2015 (11) TMI 1396

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....n the ground that DGFT notification dated 18/5/2011 removing actual user condition cannot be applied retrospectively. The appellant imported maize corn and warehoused them in the custom bonded warehouse. Thereafter they filed ex-bond bill of entry dated 21/7/2011 for clearances of the warehouse goods under Section 68 of Customs Act under import licence No. 0550002311 dated 8/7/2011 for the clearance of the goods, which are in the extracted list of import items claiming the benefit of Sr. 21 of Notification No. 21/2002-CUS dated 1/3/2002 as amended by Notification No. 42/2008CUS dated 1/4/2008, which provides exemption of this goods falling under tariff Item 1005900 on the condition that exemption applies to import under Tariff Rate Quota (T....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....s. Union of India[1995(75)ELT 32(S.C.)]. 3. On the other hand, Ld. Counsel for the respondent drew our attention to the Hon'ble Andra Pradesh High Court order in the case of the same appellant in Sriven Marketing Vs. Union of India[2012(275) ELT 39 (A.P)] which upheld validity of public notice dated 18/5/2011. He further showed us the licence under which goods were sought to be ex-bonded. To emphasized that actual user condition was not affixed on this licence. On these licenses in comparison, he showed the licence issued to the respondent for earlier period in which the actual user condition has been incorporated. Therefore he argued that once licence is issued without actual user condition the same cannot be questioned by the customs a....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... has not been issued correctly. It is for the DGFT to examine whether the licence was issued correctly or not. We may so far to say that even presuming that the licence was not issued correctly, the importer could not held to task. Importer is not at all in the knowledge of the detail procedure followed within the office of DGFT for issue of licence. Importer held valid licence under the TRQ and therefore benefit of exemption could not be denied to the respondent. The Hon'ble Apex Court held in the case of Titan Medical Systems Pvt. Ltd.. (supra) that once the licence is issued and not questioned by licencing authority, custom authority cannot be refused exemption on allegation that there was mis-representation. If there was any mis-represe....