Just a moment...
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 the benefit of the customs exemption notifications was available where imported parts were intended for use in manufacture of colour picture tubes, but a small part of the goods was damaged in transit and could not actually be used.
Analysis: The notifications granted benefit to specified imported items if they were imported for use in the manufacture of specified final products. The imported and manufactured items were covered by the notifications, and the loss arose from transit damage, not from any diversion of the goods for an unrelated purpose. The expression "for use" in similar exemption notifications was treated as meaning "intended for use", and there was no material distinction between loss by leakage and loss by damage. The object of the exemption was to deny the benefit only where the importer never intended to use the imported goods for the specified manufacture.
Conclusion: The appellant was entitled to the benefit of the notifications for the entire import consignment, including the damaged portion.
Final Conclusion: The appeal succeeded and the exemption benefit was held admissible on the footing that intended use, not actual use in every case, governed the notifications.
Ratio Decidendi: In exemption notifications using the expression "for use", the decisive test is whether the imported goods were intended for use in the specified manufacture, and transit damage does not defeat the exemption where the intended use is otherwise established.