9911796707
TMI Blog2010 (12) TMI 326X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... facts of the case are that the appellant had imported TV Broadcast 85 Studio Equipment and sought their clearance against REP licences bearing Nos. 3361987 and 3245612 as per para 177(2) of AM 1988-91 Policy. The said clearance was refused by the Customs authorities on the ground that the said goods are consumer goods covered under Appendix II(B)-Entry No. 175 of AM 91-93 Policy. The appellant preferred a Writ Petition against the same and the Hon'ble High Court of Bombay by an interim order permitted the appellant to clear the goods against ITC bond and also granted liberty to the department to adjudicate the dispute accordingly. Thereafter the impugned order was passed which was challenged by the appellant before the Hon'ble High Court o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... were under Entry 148, the import of the same was not banned and the same would not cease to be capital goods and the import of which is permitted against REP licence in terms of para 177(2) of AM 1988-91." 4. On the other hand the learned SDR submitted that the decision of the Hon'ble High Court is not relevant to this case as the Hon'ble High Court has overlooked the transitional provisions appearing in para 214(6) of the Policy of 1990-93 as per which REP licence shall not be valid for import of permissible on-OGL capital goods, tools & instruments, importable in terms of para 177(2) of 1988-91 policy which have been shifted to Appendices 1 Part A, Il-Part B or VIII of the policy. 5. In reply to the contention of the le ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... plied, the goods imported by the appellant were covered in Appendix II-Part B of the policy as alleged and hence were eligible to benefit of REP licences even in terms of the transitional provisions." 6. Heard and considered. 7. On careful examination of the submissions made by both the sides, I find that the Hon'ble High Court of Bombay has considered the import of the items in question in Writ Petition No. 1481 of 1992 Order dated 8th March 2010 [2010 (253) E.L.T. 767 (Bom.)] in detail wherein the Hon'ble High Court has observed as under :- "4. Mr. Jetly learned counsel appearing for the Revenue submitted that the importing question would be governed by the import and export policy applicable for the year AM 91-94 as th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... g which the licence was issued) would apply. In view of the decision of the Supreme Court, we have no doubt that the import in question which was effected in pursuance of a REP licence dated 13th December 1990, would be governed by the import export policy AM 1988-91". "10. Mr. Jetly, learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the equipment in question would fall under Entry No. 148 of Appendix II (Part B) of AM 1988-91 which covers all electrical equipments, systems, however described allowed under OGL or specified elsewhere. In our view, the TV broadcast & studio equipment does not fall under Entry No. 148 of paragraph Appendix II, it is not an equipment import of which is banned. It would not cease to be capital goods the imp ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
