Home Case Index All Cases Customs Customs + HC Customs - 2022 (8) TMI HC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2022 (8) TMI 1490 - HC - CustomsInterpretation of statute - N/N. 148/1994 - Refund claim - cancellation of benefit of exemption - Was not the Tribunal wrong in holding that the 'Grant' received by the importer from the European Union would come within the preview of the term 'gift' or 'donation' under Notification No.148/1994 to get exemption from duty? - liberal interpretation to Notification No.148/1994 without following the principal of law that an exemption notification has to be interpreted strictly. Maintainability of the appeal under Section 130C of Customs Act - HELD THAT:- The principal consideration is whether the goods or plant imported by the respondent would satisfy the requirement of exemption notification or not. Once exemption notification is attracted, the obligation to pay customs duty does not attract. Therefore, the issue is whether the respondent's exemption claim on the import of plant is tenable or not. It has nothing to do with the rate or the value of the goods imported by the respondent. Therefore, the appeal is rightly filed before this Court under Section 130C of the Act and is maintainable. Re-examination of issues - whether a finding of fact is correctly recorded and binding on this Court? - HELD THAT:- The CESTAT has not appreciated the sequence of circumstances culminate in the import of plant and whether a future obligation is fastened on the respondent for repayment of the cost incurred for the purchase of the plant or not. Therefore, the finding is recorded by not considering the circumstances and documents which have a bearing on the issue. For the above reasons, the findings of fact recorded are perverse and unavailable and therefore, not binding on this Court. Hence the second objection raised is also without merit, accordingly rejected. Whether exemption notification is attracted to the circumstances of the case and that the appeal at the instance of the Revenue must fail? - HELD THAT:- The findings recorded in para 5 of the order under appeal are certainly unsustainable, for it has been recorded by the CESTAT as a general application of the exemption notification. The relevant circumstances should have been placed before the CESTAT before inviting the findings in this behalf. It is believed that the CESTAT ought to be called upon to decide the merits of the appeal filed by the respondent herein and decide the core issue. The matter is remitted to CESTAT for consideration and disposal afresh as per law within four months from the date of receipt of copy of the judgment - appeal allowed by way of remand.
|