9911796707
|
Home
Issues:
1. Admissibility of ad hoc exemption for Customs duty under Section 25(2) of the Customs Act, 1962. 2. Interpretation of provisions of Sections 12, 15, and 25 of the Customs Act, 1962 regarding the timing of exemption orders. 3. Refund of duty paid based on ad hoc exemption order issued by the Government of India under Section 25(2) of the Act. Analysis: The appellants imported a photo copier machine from Singapore and applied for ad hoc exemption for Customs duty under Section 25(2) of the Customs Act, 1962. The Government of India issued an ad hoc exemption order exempting the consignment from duty. However, the Assistant Collector of Customs rejected the refund application stating that the exemption could not be applied retrospectively as the goods were already imported and cleared. The Collector (Appeals) upheld this decision citing Sections 12, 15, and 25 of the Customs Act, 1962, which require exemptions to be granted before the entry of goods into India or at least before specified dates. The appellants argued that Section 25(2) grants paramount powers to the Central Government, not bound by other provisions like Sections 12 and 15. They relied on previous Tribunal decisions to support their claim for duty refund based on the ad hoc exemption order. The Tribunal considered the arguments and previous decisions. It noted that previous rulings held that an exemption order under Section 25(2) remains valid even if goods have been cleared, without the need for retrospective application. The Tribunal emphasized that Section 25(2) does not restrict the timing of exemption grants by the Central Government. It clarified that special exemption orders are administrative, not legislative, hence retrospective considerations are irrelevant. Referring to a similar case, the Tribunal ruled that Customs duty refund should be granted for consignments covered by ad hoc exemptions even if goods were cleared before the exemption order issuance. Consequently, the Tribunal set aside the lower authorities' decision and allowed the appeal, following the precedent set by previous judgments and upholding the appellants' right to duty refund based on the ad hoc exemption order issued by the Central Government.
|
