9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2023 (3) TMI 304 - HC - CustomsBenefit of Exemption - aircraft - Usage Conditions - Non-compliance with the requirement that the aircraft is required to be used for providing non-scheduled (passenger) service (aircraft used for private purposes) - allegation against the respondent was that it had not complied with the undertaking furnished in terms of the Condition 104 of the Notification No.21/2002-Cus. dated 01.03.2002 as amended by the Custom Notification No.61/2007-Cus. (CUS dated 03.05.2007) In terms of the Condition No.104. Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case the Hon ble Tribunal is right in holding that the Customs Authority cannot examine whether the appellants have fulfilled the condition of exemption notification? - HELD THAT - The same is covered in favour of the Revenue and against the assessee by a recent decision of this Court in EAST INDIA HOTELS LTD. VERSUS COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS CENTRAL EXCISE AND CENTRAL GST NEW DELHI 2023 (2) TMI 47 - DELHI HIGH COURT . The question whether an undertaking as furnished in terms of Condition 104 of the Notification in question is complied with or not is required to be considered by the Custom Authorities. The Custom Authorities are not bound by the decision of the DGCA. Whether the respondent had complied with Condition 104 of the Notification and had used the aircraft for providing non-scheduled (passenger) services? - HELD THAT - The said question is also covered by the decision in EAST INDIA HOTELS LTD. VERSUS COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS CENTRAL EXCISE AND CENTRAL GST NEW DELHI 2023 (2) TMI 47 - DELHI HIGH COURT . It is not disputed that the respondent has provided the said services for remuneration. Notwithstanding that the respondent has not published its tariff for providing the said services it has nonetheless complied with the conditions of providing non-scheduled (passenger) services as defined in Explanation to Condition 104 of the Notification in question. No substantial questions of law arise in the present appeal - Appeal disposed off.
Issues involved:
1. Appeal against an order passed by the Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal. 2. Allegations of non-compliance with conditions under the Customs Act, 1962 regarding the use of an imported aircraft for non-scheduled (passenger) services. 3. Tribunal's decision allowing the respondent's appeal based on the permit granted by the Director General of Civil Aviation. 4. Questions projected by the Revenue for consideration by the High Court regarding the Tribunal's decision. 5. Interpretation of the Notification's conditions and compliance with non-scheduled (passenger) services requirements. Analysis: 1. The Revenue filed an appeal against the Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal's order regarding an imported aircraft's use for non-scheduled (passenger) services. The Tribunal found that the aircraft was used as per the permit granted by the Director General of Civil Aviation (DGCA) and for remuneration purposes. The Tribunal's decision was influenced by a previous Larger Bench order in a similar case. 2. The Commissioner of Customs had raised a demand and imposed penalties on the respondent for alleged non-compliance with conditions under the Customs Act. The Tribunal's decision was based on the interpretation of the conditions specified in the exemption notification regarding non-scheduled (passenger) services. The Tribunal concluded that the respondent had used the aircraft for remuneration and in line with the DGCA permit. 3. The High Court considered questions raised by the Revenue challenging the Tribunal's decision. The Court referred to a recent decision in a similar case where it was held that the Customs Authorities are responsible for verifying compliance with conditions, not bound by the DGCA's decision. The Court also reiterated that the respondent had provided non-scheduled (passenger) services for remuneration. 4. The Court addressed the questions regarding compliance with the exemption notification's conditions, classification of the aircraft, the allowance of charter services by non-scheduled (passenger) operators, and the obligation to issue tickets. The Court found in favor of the Revenue on the issue of Customs Authorities' examination of compliance but upheld the Tribunal's decision on the respondent's compliance with the conditions for duty exemption. 5. Ultimately, the High Court disposed of the appeal, stating that no substantial questions of law arose. The Court upheld the Tribunal's decision regarding the respondent's compliance with the conditions for providing non-scheduled (passenger) services, as defined in the exemption notification. This detailed analysis outlines the key issues, the Tribunal's decision, the questions raised by the Revenue, and the High Court's final judgment, providing a comprehensive understanding of the legal judgment.
|
