Just a moment...

Top
Help
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
Call Us / Help / Feedback

Contact Us At :

E-mail: [email protected]

Call / WhatsApp at: +91 99117 96707

For more information, Check Contact Us

FAQs :

To know Frequently Asked Questions, Check FAQs

Most Asked Video Tutorials :

For more tutorials, Check Video Tutorials

Submit Feedback/Suggestion :

Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
TMI Blog
Home / TMI Blogs / RSS

1995 (10) TMI 111

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....the authorisation from the Ministry of Defence/Coast Guard before the clearance of imported goods namely two main and 23 ancillary unprotected FRP moulds for the construction of FRP vessels for the Indian Coast Guard totally valued at Rs. 69,76,318/- against the Govt. of India Contract No. FM/0641/1BS/Contract/90 dated 9-1-1990, for the purpose of availing the benefit of the exemption Notification No. 291/84, dated 28-12-1984. He has further directed that the importer shall also give an undertaking that the goods will be appropriated for the construction of Coast Guard Vessels only and shall not be utilised for any other purpose. He has finally ordered that the importers shall also surrender the moulds to the Coast Guard after the completio....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....tated reason". 2. We have heard Shri Vijay Singh for the Revenue and Shri A.S. Sunder Rajan, ld. Advocate for the importer. Ld. DR relied on the above Board's order and submitted that the report of the expert Dandekar should have been accepted and as a consequence, the importers should have been imposed with penalty and fine and benefit of the notification should have been denied. 3. Ld. Advocate submitted that Shri Dandekar's report is a motivated report and he had deliberately given a doubtful finding regarding the imported moulds being old one solely on presumption and assumptions. He had been their business rival and they had some litigation and friction on that account of it. The Tata Tea Ltd. were Lloyd's sub-agent, wh....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....uld be used ones. Yet he also opines that "it is just not possible to get a new mould manufactured and delivered in India". This opinion is rebuttable one. The importer has produced a report of Tata Tea Ltd. who are sub-agents of Lloyd's, a reputed company and on that basis, insurance cover has been given. This report states that the moulds were manufactured at manufacturer yard and transferred to Brighton. From Brighton to South Hampton and then slupped to Hamburg and discharged. At Hamburg, the moulds were lying for about fifteen days and then loaded on M.V. `Vishva Bhandan', which sailed to Goa via Bombay. The report states that the moulds were constructed in September, 1990 and were certified fit for despatch after being insured for one....