Just a moment...
Generate professional replies to Show Cause Notices, assessment orders, audit objections, and other legal communications using TaxTMI's AI Drafter.
Step 1 – Issue Identification & Review
The AI analyses your query, notice, order, or uploaded documents and identifies the key issues involved.
• Review the issues identified by the AI
• Add, edit, remove, or refine issues as required
Step 2 – Draft Generation
Once you approve the issues, the AI performs issue-wise legal research and prepares a structured draft response.
• Relevant statutory provisions
• Judicial precedents and Supreme Court, High Court and other citations
• Issue-wise legal analysis
• Practical arguments and supporting content
• Professionally structured draft ready for further review. 
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether copper scrap 'Druid' imported for jobbing under Notification No. 32/97 could be imported without a licence, certificate or permission, and whether confiscation under Section 111(d) of the Customs Act, 1962 was sustainable.
Analysis: Notification No. 32/97 permits duty-free import of specified goods for job work and re-export, subject to the notification conditions. Para 4.2.7 of the Foreign Trade Policy, 2004-09 provides that goods, including those restricted in ITC (HS) but not prohibited, may be permitted for jobbing without a licence, certificate or permission in terms of the relevant notification issued by the Department of Revenue. The imported item was treated as restricted rather than prohibited, and the statutory scheme did not require a separate import licence or certificate for the purpose of jobbing under the notification. On that footing, confiscation under Section 111(d) could not be sustained. As the confiscation under Section 111(m) was not challenged, the matter on fine and penalty required reconsideration.
Conclusion: Confiscation of the goods under Section 111(d) was set aside, and the matter was remanded to the Commissioner (Appeals) for redetermination of fine and penalty.
Final Conclusion: The importer succeeded on the legality of confiscation under Section 111(d), but the consequential quantification of fine and penalty was left for fresh adjudication on remand.
Ratio Decidendi: Goods imported for jobbing under a valid revenue notification, if restricted but not prohibited under the import policy, do not require a separate licence, certificate or permission, and confiscation under the provision relating to prohibited or unauthorised imports cannot be sustained on that basis.