Concessional customs exemption denied where licence was issued after import and relating back could not satisfy the notification condition.

Notification No. 160/92-Cus. required the importer to possess a valid licence issued by the licensing authority on the date of import. Because the licences were issued only after the goods had already been imported, the condition precedent for the concessional rate was not met. The doctrine of relating back could not override the express wording of the notification or cure the absence of a valid licence at the time of import. The importers were therefore not entitled to the exemption benefit, and the appeals were rejected.

---

---

Issues: Whether the importers were entitled to the benefit of Notification No. 160/92-Cus. despite the licences being issued after the date of import, and whether the doctrine of relating back could be applied to treat them as having a valid licence on the date of import.

Analysis: The notification expressly required possession of a valid licence issued on or after 1-5-95 by the licensing authority on the date of import. The licences in question were issued only after the goods had already been imported in March 1995. In view of the clear wording of the notification, the subsequent issue of licences could not be treated as satisfying the condition precedent for availing the concession, and the doctrine of relating back was held inapplicable against the express statutory requirement.

Conclusion: The importers were not entitled to the benefit of the concessional rate of duty under Notification No. 160/92-Cus., and the appeals were rejected.

---