1984 (6) TMI 145 - HC - Customs

Court Upholds Import of T.V. Parts, Rejects Customs Arguments

The court rejected the Customs Authorities' arguments regarding the validity of import licenses for complete T.V. sets, permitting the import of parts ... Imports - Additional licence - Import of complete T.V. set prohibited Issues Involved:1. Validity of Import Licences2. Classification of Imported Goods3. Transferability of Additional Licences4. Coverage under REP Licences5. Customs Authorities' Decision and Court's InterferenceSummary of Judgment:1. Validity of Import Licences:The Customs Authorities argued that the goods imported under Additional Licences were prohibited as they were complete T.V. sets, which was not permissible. The court rejected this contention, stating that the respective licences of individual export houses should be considered separately, and the import of parts that could make a complete T.V. set when assembled was permissible.2. Classification of Imported Goods:The court examined whether the imported items such as Picture Tubes, Plastic Moulded Parts, Electronic Tuners, and Remote Control were covered under the Additional Licences and REP licences. It was determined that these items were indeed covered by the relevant Appendices of the Import Policies of 1982-83 and 1983-84.3. Transferability of Additional Licences:The Customs Authorities contended that the Additional Licences were transferred for consideration, which was not permissible. The court found no evidence of such transfer and held that the goods were imported by the Export Houses themselves, who had negotiated and retired the documents through their banks, and had entered into High Sea Sale agreements with the writ petitioner.4. Coverage under REP Licences:The court discussed whether items like Printed Circuit Boards, Transformers, Speakers, and Deflection Wires were covered under A.35(d) of Appendix 17 of the 1983-84 Policy. It was concluded that these items were covered as they were used in the manufacture of electronic items, and the interpretation by the Customs Authorities at other ports supported this view.5. Customs Authorities' Decision and Court's Interference:The court noted that identical goods had been cleared under identical licences at other ports, and there should be uniformity in the application of the Import Policy and Customs Act across different ports. The Customs Authorities were directed to complete the assessments and release the goods upon payment of the assessed duty by the writ petitioner.Conclusion:The applications by the Customs Authorities were dismissed, and the interim orders were vacated. The Customs Authorities were directed to complete the assessments and release the goods. The court confirmed the orders passed by A.K. Janah, J., and held that there was no substantial question of law for an appeal to the Supreme Court. The prayer for stay of the judgment was also refused.