Customs exemption period and vessel classification: clearance date governs six-month limit, and coastal-to-foreign conversion does not trigger enhanced duty.

An exemption conditioned on export within six months was applied from the date the imported vessel was cleared for home consumption and placed at the importer's disposal, not from an earlier import-related date. On the admitted facts, the vessel was therefore not retained beyond the relevant period, so enhanced duty for delayed retention was not sustainable and duty remained confined to 15%. The note also states that Chapter 89 classification turns on navigability: a vessel moving on its own steam and capable of coastal or foreign run conversion did not incur fresh enhanced duty merely because it was later treated as foreign run, since conversion alone does not alter its character as a vessel.

---

---

Issues: (i) whether the vessel was retained in India beyond the six-month period prescribed in the exemption notification so as to attract enhanced duty; (ii) whether the vessel was correctly classifiable under Heading 8901 or Heading 8905 of the First Schedule to the Customs Tariff Act, 1975, and whether the conversion between coastal and foreign run affected duty liability.

Issue (i): whether the vessel was retained in India beyond the six-month period prescribed in the exemption notification so as to attract enhanced duty.

Analysis: The exemption notification required export of the goods within six months from importation. The operative period was held to commence only when the imported goods were cleared for home consumption and placed at the disposal of the importer, having regard to the scheme of import, imported goods, importer, and clearance under the Customs Act, 1962. On the admitted dates, the vessel was not retained beyond the relevant period.

Conclusion: The enhanced duty on the footing of retention beyond six months was not sustainable; duty was confined to 15%.

Issue (ii): whether the vessel was correctly classifiable under Heading 8901 or Heading 8905 of the First Schedule to the Customs Tariff Act, 1975, and whether the conversion between coastal and foreign run affected duty liability.

Analysis: Chapter 89 distinguishes vessels by the primacy of navigability. The vessel moved on its own steam and was capable of conversion between coastal and foreign run. The classification dispute did not create a fresh duty liability merely because the vessel was later treated as foreign run, as a vessel does not cease to be a vessel or become liable to enhanced duty merely by such conversion.

Conclusion: The vessel was not liable to enhanced duty on the basis of reclassification or conversion between coastal and foreign run.

Final Conclusion: The impugned order was unsustainable and the appeal was allowed, with the duty demand confined to the extent already accepted in the decision.

Ratio Decidendi: For a vessel covered by an exemption conditioned on export within a stated period, the period runs from clearance for home consumption, and conversion between coastal and foreign run does not by itself create enhanced customs duty liability where the vessel remains a vessel and navigability governs the relevant classification.

---