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

1980 (3) TMI 92

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ng wheels. The synthetic diamond grits are subject to customs duty under the Indian Tariff Act (item 87), For this item the standard rate of duty payable was 60 per cent ad valorem, It appears there was a reduction of this rate later, but that is not material for our purpose. Under Notification No. 2, dated 1-1-1969), issued by the Government of India, Ministry of Finance, synthetic abrasive grains or powder imported for the manufacture of grinding wheels or coated abrasives are exempt from the payment of customs duty leviable thereon which is specified in the Indian Tariff Act, as is in excess of 27-1/2 per cent ad valorem, 'provided that the importer, by the execution of a bond in such form and in such sum, as may be prescribed by the Ass .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... e' for the levy of concessional rate and refund. The petitioner filed revision petition before the Government of India, Ministry or Finance. By the time the revision petition was filed, the petitioner was able to secure the the 'End Use Certificate' from the Director of Industries and Commerce, Madras, and it produced the same before the Government of India. But, the Government of India rejected the revision petition on entirely different grounds from that on which they were dismissed by the Assistant Collector and the Appellate Collector of Customs. The grounds mentioned by the Government of India in the impugned order were that the petitioner did not execute the bond at the time of importation as required in the terms of the proviso to th .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... e than one year. Even after he forwarded the same to the Director of Industries and Commerce, Madras, the Director has delayed it for a period of six months. But the Assistant Collector of Customs as also the Appellate Collector of Customs, would not wait for the production of that certificate. That was the reason for the delay in producing the certificate. These facts are not denied in the counter affidavit filed in this case. It may be seen from the facts of the case that the petitioner was not guilty of any laches, but it is the Assistant Director of Industries and Commerce, Coimbatore, and the Director of Industries and Commerce, Madras that have delayed the issue of 'End Use Certificate'. The petitioner did not wait for the 'End Use Ce .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... isional stages, it should have been accepted by the revisional or appellate authorities. This is something similar to the production of 'C' forms in sales tax matters in order to be eligible for a dealer to pay concessional rate of sales tax. This court has been taking a consistent view that though normally a dealer is expected to produce the 'C' form at the time of assessment, even if it is produced in the appellate or revisional stages or even when a further revision in this court is pending, that will have to be taken into account and the relief granted. In the circumstances, Therefore, the non-production of 'End Use Certificate' even at the time when the application for refund was made before the Assistant Collector of Customs does not .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... e, the refund application could not be rejected on the ground that the petitioner had not executed a bond at the time of import. 5. It was then contended by the learned Counsel for the respondents that the petitioner had not produced the 'End Use Certificate' in respect of the entire quantity of the synthetic grits imported and that the certificate originally produced at the time of revision covered only a portion of the quantity. The learned Counsel for the petitioner stated that the petitioner has now got the certificate for the entire quantity. Learned Counsel for the petitioner also contended that even if the 'End Use Certificate' did not cover the entire quantity he should have been given the refund in respect of that portion of the .....

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