9911796707
TMI Blog1994 (7) TMI 173X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... two cases is whether the short-levy demanded is barred by time or not in terms of Section 28 of the Customs Act, 1962. Referring to the Section 28 of the Customs Act, he said that to issue notice for such short-levy it should be within one year in the case of any import made by any individual for his personal use or Government or by any educational research or charitable institution or hospital and in any other case it should be within six months. He submitted that Seection 28(a) is not applicable in this case because of the fact that the importer was neither individual nor car was used for personal purpose and accordingly the demand was barred by time since the show cause notice was issued after prescribed time limit of six moths under Sec ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ovisions of the Customs Act the appellant is an importer and it is clear from the declaration given in the bill of entry that car was imported in his individual capacity. Since it was imported in his individual capacity and used for personal purpose time limit is applicable as prescribed under Section 28(a) of the Customs Act and accordingly it was not barred by time. 4. We have considered the matter. It was argued that the appellant could not import the car in question but for the fact that he was the sole resident representative of foreign Company and import was covered under category `H' of Appendix 6 of the Hand Book for 1982-83 as it is evident from the Customs Clearance Permit granted to him by the Ministry of Commerce. Since th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e car. He obtained the Customs Clearance Permit as representatives of the Company to import the car and the entire cost of the car was met by the foreign company. This piece of evidence was not rebutted by the Department. Hence the act of Agent is binding on the company. The mere fact that declaration was in individual name in the Bill of Entry is not a ground to hold that the car was imported by him in his individual capacity in the facts and circumstances of the case. Since the term individual has been used in Section 28(a) and the car was imported on behalf of the Company, it cannot be said that import was covered by under Section 28(a) of the Customs Act. 5. While deciding the issue of actual importer in the case of Indian Potash ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
