TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
When case Id is present, search is done only for this
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>Tribunal Modifies Import Ruling: Confirms Confiscation, Lowers Fine, Removes Penalty for Insufficient Evidence.</h1> <h3>IVRCL INFRASTRUCTURES & PROJECTS LTD. Versus CC., CHENNAI (SEA)</h3> IVRCL INFRASTRUCTURES & PROJECTS LTD. Versus CC., CHENNAI (SEA) - 2004 (166) E.L.T. 447 (Tri. - Del.) Issues Involved:1. Whether the imported goods conform to the description of item No. 1 in List-11 under Notification No. 17/2001-Cus.2. Whether IVRCL was an eligible importer in terms of Condition No. 38 of the Notification.Summary:Issue 1: Description of Imported GoodsThe appellants filed Bill of Entry for clearance of imported goods declared as 'Hot mix plant batch type with electronic controls and bag tyre filter arrangement 160 tons per hour capacity' under Customs Tariff Heading 8474.80 at 'nil' rate under Notification No. 17/2001-Cus. The Commissioner of Customs held that the imported goods were only components and not a complete Hot Mix Plant, thus denying the benefit of duty exemption. The Tribunal found documentary and oral evidence supporting the Commissioner's finding that only some components of the hot mix plant were imported, and not the complete plant. Therefore, the goods did not satisfy the description at Item No. (1) of List-11 under the Notification, and the benefit of exemption could not be extended to them.Issue 2: Eligibility of IVRCL as ImporterThe contract for road construction was awarded to the Joint Venture of SPCL and IVRCL by NHAI. The Tribunal held that the Joint Venture was a partnership, and any of the partners, including IVRCL, was competent to import goods for the Joint Venture. The Tribunal referenced the Supreme Court's judgment in New Horizons Ltd. & Another v. Union of India & Others to support the partnership concept of a Joint Venture. The Tribunal concluded that IVRCL fulfilled Condition No. 38 of the Notification, thus being an eligible importer.Additional Findings:The Tribunal sustained the final assessment of the Bill of Entry and the order of confiscation of goods u/s 111(m) of the Customs Act for misdeclaration. However, the redemption fine was reduced from Rs. 5 lakhs to Rs. 1 lakh, and the penalty of Rs. 1 lakh imposed u/s 112 of the Customs Act was set aside due to lack of requisite finding against the importer. The appeal was disposed of with these modifications.
TaxTMI 