1991 (6) TMI 128 - AT - Customs

Summary

Issues:
1. Interpretation of eligibility for import under Open General Licence (OGL) and exemption under Notifications 185/88 and 342/76.
2. Determination of whether appellants were acting as agents of AIMTC for import purposes.
3. Consideration of quantum of redemption fine imposed by lower authorities.

Analysis:
1. The appeal challenged an order regarding the import of tyre, tube, and flap sets under Entry 46 of Appendix 6 of Import Policy 1988-91 and exemption under Notifications 185/88 and 342/76. The Deputy Collector held that the appellants were not covered by the entry and were ineligible for exemption under the notifications. The Collector of Customs (Appeals) upheld this decision, with a modification in the redemption fine amount.

2. The appellants argued that they were importing as agents of AIMTC, a registered entity eligible under Notification 185/88. They claimed to have a letter of authority from AIMTC and had applied for import sanction. The Deputy Collector, however, considered the appellants as the real importers, not entitled to the exemption. The appellants contended that they were authorized agents and eligible for the exemption, citing relevant legal provisions and precedents.

3. The Department argued that the appellants, as agents, were ineligible for the exemption under Notification 185/88, which specified eligible importers as Associations of owners of vehicles only. The Department emphasized that the import was not covered by a valid license, justifying the confiscation and fine. The Collector (Appeals) had already reduced the redemption fine.

4. The Tribunal analyzed the import eligibility under OGL and exemption under Notification 185/88. It found that AIMTC, not the appellants, was approved for import under the notification. The appellants' claim of acting as agents under para 121(2)(iv) was deemed untenable as no evidence of recognition by the concerned State Director of Industries was presented. The Tribunal upheld the lower authorities' decision that the import was unauthorized and ineligible for the exemption. The quantum of redemption fine was considered reasonable, and the appeal was rejected.