Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding


  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

2015 (9) TMI 1367

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... not be covered as restricted category of Basmati Rice – Nowhere in DGFT Policy, it was mentioned that if grain size restrictions were satisfied then Agmark authority’s opinion will be Final Say on classification of Basmati Rice – Supreme Court in case of Balwant Singh Vs. Jagdish Singh [2010 (7) TMI 556 - SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] opined that Provisions of Statute had to be given full effect to Legislative intent to achieve intended objective – Therefore in view of said observations Confiscation order was not justified and order set aside – Decided in favour of Assesse. - Appeal No : C/11943/2014 - Order No. A/11057/2015 - Dated:- 17-7-2015 - Mr. H.K. Thakur, J. For the Petitioner : Mrs. Prabjyoti K Chadha (Advocate) For the Re .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... e grain under notification no. 57/2009-2014 Dated 17/08/2010. Learned advocate relied upon the following Case Laws where same issue has been decided in favour of other rice exporters:- (i) Shri Jagdamba Agrico Export Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Customs, Kandla [2014 (307) E.L.T. 764 (Tri.-Ahmd.) (ii) Global Agro Impex Vs. Commissioner of Customs, Noida [2013 (290) D.L.T. 717 (Tri.-Del.) (iii) HRMM Agro Overseas Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Customs,Kandla 2013 (292) E.L.T. 68 Tri.-Ahmd.) 3.Shri S. Shukla (Authorised Representative) appearing on behalf of the Revenue argued that similar case based on the test carried out by Eggmark Laboratory was upheld by this bench in the case of Parvaz Overseas Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ons of the notification specifications of Rice Grain have been specified as per the restriction imposed in the last column of Serial No. 45AA. According to these restrictions grain of rice should be more than 6.61mm of length and ration of length to breadth of the grain shall be more than 3.5. There is no definition of Basmati Rice in the notification and there is also no stipulation that inspite of satisfying the size still the rice can be Non-Basmati Rice. Therefore all the Rice Categories being sold as Basmati Rice in the Commercial Parlance and having the dimension mentioned in the notification will not be covered as a restricted category of Basmati Rice. It is also observed that DGFT Policy Circular Dated 05/02/2014 only talks of drawa .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... rts Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Customs, Kandla(Supra) by making following observations:- 11.On perusal of the records, we find that it is undisputed that all the consignments which were carted in for export, had conformed to the specification of average length and the ratio of length to breadth as per notifications claimed by the appellant. We find that the said notifications had only the conditions which are reproduced here in a above and does not indicate any other condition to be satisfied for coming to a conclusion whether the consignment of rice is basmati or non-basmati ricfe. It is to be noted that the said notification even does not indicate any admixture to be considered for the purpose of getting benefit of the said notific .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... the goods presented conformed to the prescribed standards, we are of the view that the goods cannot be considered as goods prohibited for export and therefore we are f the view that the confiscation of the goods under Section 113(d) of the Customs Act is not maintainable. Therefore, we set aside the impugned order confiscating the goods and imposing the penalty. It can be noticed from the above reproduced paragraphs, the argument of the ld. Departmental Representative was same as was before the Bench in that case. We are of the considered view that the above reproduced ratio covers the issue squarely in favour of the appellant. 13.Now, we consider the case laws cited by the Id. Departmental Representative in the case of Parvaz Over .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates