DEPB TRA validity under customs law: a valid Telegraphic Release Advice must be accepted like a DEPB licence.

Telegraphic Release Advice under the DEPB scheme was treated as equivalent to a DEPB licence for debiting imports, because no provision in the Customs Act, EXIM Policy, or DGFT notice justified a different treatment. Circular No. 68/2000-Cus. was read as recognising the TRA facility and permitting issuance from the port of registration for use at the relevant customs station. On that basis, a valid TRA could not be rejected merely because the goods had already been cleared, and the refusal to accept the TRAs was arbitrary and unsustainable.

---

---

Issues: Whether Telegraphic Release Advice under the DEPB scheme could be treated at par with a DEPB licence for permitting debit against imports and whether the customs authorities were justified in refusing to accept the TRAs for clearances already made.

Analysis: The DEPB licence and the TRA were treated by the lower authorities on a different footing without any statutory, policy, or procedural basis. No provision of the Customs Act, the EXIM Policy, or any DGFT public notice was shown to justify such differentiation. Circular No. 68/2000-Cus. clarified the working of TRA facility and did not restrict its use; instead, it contemplated TRA being issued from the port of registration of the DEPB scrip for debit at the relevant customs station. In that background, a valid TRA could not be excluded merely because the goods had already been cleared, and the refusal to accept it was arbitrary.

Conclusion: TRA, if otherwise valid, had to be accepted at par with a DEPB licence. The rejection of the TRAs and the consequential demand were unsustainable and the appeal succeeded.

---