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 clarifies import licensing terms for multiple items, allows proportional import. Commissioner to review compliance.</h1> <h3>NON WOVEN (I) LTD. Versus COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS, MUMBAI</h3> NON WOVEN (I) LTD. Versus COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS, MUMBAI - 1999 (105) E.L.T. 696 (Tribunal) Issues: Interpretation of licensing terms regarding import of specific items under a quantity-based advance license.The judgment involves the interpretation of licensing terms related to the import of specific items under a quantity-based advance license. The appellant imported a consignment of polyester staple fibre as a supporting manufacturer of a company issued a quantity-based advance license for import against export of PVC floor covering. The license listed ten items, including polyester (non woven felt), polyester staple fibre, and polyester waste. The dispute arose when customs authorities refused to accept the license for the imported consignments, claiming that only one item from the list could be imported. The department argued that the word 'or' between the items indicated that only one product could be imported, not a combination. However, the tribunal analyzed the wording of the license and its significance, noting that any of the three items listed was required for manufacturing export goods. The tribunal found that the appellant could rightfully claim import proportionately of any or all the three items, as the wording of the license allowed for such interpretation.The appellant's advocate argued that the imported goods, ordered to be confiscated, were not cleared and were sold by the department. Therefore, the appeal focused on the return of the sale proceeds. The tribunal noted that the import quantity and value restrictions under the license needed to be determined to decide on the return of the sale proceeds. The tribunal allowed the appeal, setting aside the impugned order and directing the Assistant Commissioner to determine if the import was within the license restrictions at the time of import. If so, the tribunal instructed the return of the sale proceeds to the appellant, minus expenses. The Assistant Commissioner was required to pass orders according to law regarding the matter.
TaxTMI 