9911796707
TMI Blog2020 (2) TMI 1082X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... .T. 276 (Tri. - Bang.)] and other miscellaneous application dated 9-7-2019 is filed by the Department seeking rectification of the order passed by the Tribunal dated 27-3-2019. 2.1 Background facts of the case are that the appellant had filed an appeal No. C/21853/2018 against the impugned order passed by the Commissioner (Appeals) whereby the Commissioner (Appeals) has upheld the order passed by the original authority. Along with the appeal, the appellant/importer filed a miscellaneous application for release of the impugned goods and the Tribunal after considering the submissions of both the parties vide its Misc. Order No. 20146/2019 [2019 (367) E.L.T. 276 (Tri. - Bang.)] allowed the application for provisional release of the impug ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ing the relevant period, the restrictions were applicable. Further the applicant states that this Tribunal in appeal No. C/22007/2018 in the case of M/s. Alfa Click Innovations, vide Final Order No. 20295/2019, dated 29-3-2019 [2019 (367) E.L.T. 273 (Tri.- Bang.)] has allowed the importer to re-export the goods by holding that the appellant in that case did not have the clearance from the DGCA and import licence from the DGFT. On these two grounds, the Department seeks rectification of the order passed by the Tribunal. 2.2. The appellant/importer filed reply to the ROM application wherein he has cited various requirements for issue of Unmanned Aircraft Operator Permit and other regulations of the DGCA. He has also produced a clarifica ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... in that case which is identical to the present case. 6. After considering the submissions of both the parties and perusal of the material on record, we find that there is no error apparent in the order passed by the Tribunal dated 27-3-2019 whereby the Tribunal after considering the submissions of both the parties and after examining the regulations of DGCA and DGFT, has directed the Customs authorities to release the goods on payment of appropriate customs duty. The Customs Department did not file any appeal against the said order of the Tribunal but at the same time did not comply with the directions to release of the impugned goods. When the importer filed an application praying for enforcement of the order and notice sent to the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... through the DGCA notifications, this Bench had reasons to believe that by the sheer size and weight, the impugned goods (being less than 250 gms) are beyond the purview of the clarification issued by the DGCA/DGFT policy. In addition, the appellant has successfully demonstrated that assuming, not accepting the Department's contention on the impugned goods is correct, the restrictions of DGCA placed are apparently on the use of impugned goods by the prospective users and not by the importer under any circumstances. Therefore looking into the nature of the goods and the DGCA instructions, this Bench has rightly passed the miscellaneous order dated 27-3-2019. Further we have observed in our order dated 27-3-2019 that the applicant/importer has ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
