1998 (12) TMI 251

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....e-consideration of the recalled order. 2. Briefly, the point at issue is whether the squids which have been imported as bait for catching Tuna Fish in the industry of deep sea fishing were consumer goods or not. Revenue alleges that being consumer goods they would require a licence for import which was not available. 3. Heard Shri M.S. Kumaraswamy, learned Consultant for the appellants who submits that squids have already been considered in the said recall order to be not of the fish family. He further submits that no evidence has been led by the department that squids are consumed by human beings in India. As against this even at the original stage he has submitted 2 technical opinions of 2 Government authorities viz., Dire....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... the imports would be hit having already been held as consumer goods. The issue now cannot be re-opened in view of the said interim order. 6. Learned Consultant rises to rebut that the said miscellaneous order is not a final order. The issue there was basically a mistake on record which would only be recall of the order. Once the final order has been recalled by the miscellaneous order, both the final order and the miscellaneous order are non est. Therefore, there is no bar in considering the entire matter afresh. 7. I have carefully considered the submissions of both sides and the facts on record. I find that though in the miscellaneous order there has been a prima facie finding that the squids imported could be considered ....