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 polyvinyl alcohol imported as binder resin was covered by the advance licence for binder (resin) and, if so, whether confiscation for misdeclaration and denial of the duty exemption notification were justified.
Analysis: The imported material was found on test to be synthetic resin. The evidence relied upon showed that polyvinyl alcohol is used as a binder in leather manufacture, and the licensing description of binder (resin) was broad enough to cover the import. The record did not establish any concealment or false description by the importer, and the quantity or precise extent of end-use did not by itself justify rejection of coverage under the licence where no quantity restriction was shown. As the goods were held to fall within the licence description, the importer was entitled to the connected duty-free benefit under the notification.
Conclusion: The confiscation and misdeclaration findings were unsustainable, and the importer was entitled to clearance of the goods under the licence with the benefit of the exemption notification.
Ratio Decidendi: Where imported goods are shown by reliable material to fall within the description in an advance licence, and no false declaration is established, customs cannot deny the licence benefit or the associated exemption solely on a restrictive view of end-use or quantity absent a clear licence limitation.