9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (8) TMI 370X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . was charterer of the vessel, Atlantic Shipping Pvt. Ltd. were the agents of the vessel and M/s Captain A Thangavel was captain/master of the vessel. He pointed out that on 16/05/2008, the vessel was on Hazira Port, Surat, for discharge of cargo and it was tentatively planned to be sent to Fujairah, Bahrain. On 19/05/2008, M/s RIL instructed the captain of vessel by mail to proceed towards Fujairah after completing the discharge at Hazira. The vessel thereafter sailed towards Fujairah. The vessel also obtained certificate from Supdt. of Customs for reversal of said vessel to foreign run vessel from coastal. The vessel further sailed from Hazira on 20/05/2008. For certain reason the vessel was no longer required at Fujairah and therefore, b ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sel for the appellant argued that in terms of section 86 & 87 of the Customs Act 1962, any imported goods may be transferred to and remain onboard any vessel without payment of duty. However, same may only be consumed during the period the vessel is a foreign going vessel. He argued that the manner in which such stores are to be used is provided in section 87. It prescribes no condition that at the time when the stores are received, the vessel should be on foreign run. He argued that the section solely provide the time at which the such stores are to be consumed and there is no restriction on the time when the stores can be received. He also relied on the decision of the tribunal in the case of Jaisu Shipping Company 2009 (234) ELT 469 whic ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... mposed. 5. Ld. AR relied on the impugned order. He pointed out that Atlantic Shipping Company had issued No Objection Certificate dated 16/05/2008 to M/s Adani Enterprises and certified that the vessel is on foreign run. He argued that it showed that even on 16/05/2008, the appellants were aware that the vessel would be at Sikka port on 22/05/2008. He further argued that the master of the vessel also vide requisition dated 22/05/2008 requested the installation manager of the Adani Enterprises Ltd to supply the bunker certifying therein that the vessel is on foreign run. He argued that from the record it is clear that when this declaration was given, the vessel was not foreign run but on the coastal run. 6. We have gone through rival submi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ired and prepared for its onward voyage in November, 1999 appears to be reasonable. There is no finding that the materials were consumed while the vessel was in Kandla Port. Considering that the vessel has finally gone out of the country and considering that the transshipment permission was validly given by the Mumbai Customs authorities, the demand of duty and penal action taken by the Kandla Customs authorities are not sustainable. From the above it is apparent that the Tribunal held that Status as vessel, whether coastal or foreign run, is not relevant at the time when the duty free goods are received. The only requirement is that the duty free goods should be consumed when the vessel is on foreign run. In the instant case, there is ab ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
