2017 (10) TMI 157

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....Jamnagar. Since the issue involved in these appeals is identical, a common order is being passed. 2. The brief facts of the case are that the appellants had imported old and used vessels for breaking purpose which were classified under 89 08. Along with the vessels, the appellants imported Marine Gas Oil (HSD) lying in the fuel tanks. The issue to be decided is whether such imported MGO has been imported in contravention of the provisions of import/export policy. According to the Revenue, the said MGO (HSD) would be classifiable under Ch 27 of the Customs Tariff Act, and therefore, is a restricted item. The appellants contend that it should be considered as part of the vessels and be classified under TH 89.08 of the import policy. 3. ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....h State Trading Agencies. Appellants, on the other hand, argued that HSD is not separately imported by the appellants and was found contained in the vessel as fuel/ship stores at the time of purchase and no extra price is paid for such fuel. It is observed that DGFT under F. No. IPC/4/5(684)/97/82/PC-2(A), dated 26-6-2013 has opined that surplus fuel stored in the fuel tanks (whether inside or outside engine room) forms a part of the ship/vessels imported for breaking up and should be considered as integrated part of the vessel's machinery and is classifiable under 89.08. 4.1 It is further observed that Para 2.3 of Chapter 2? of the Foreign Trade Policy (2009 to 2014), contained in General Provisions Regarding Imports & Exports, is r....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....t would be physically impossible for one DGFT to personally sign replies to these apart from his numerous other responsibilities. Secondly, here there is no certification required of a named authority in the body of a fiscal notification concerning exemption from Customs duty. Such a clarification required from only a named authority is a different requirement than the issue of a clarification on import policy. Therefore, we cannot agree with ld. DR that the clarificatory letter needs to be rechecked by a reference to the DGFT on whether it reflects the opinion of DGFT as it is signed by JDGFT. 19. We also find that it is now a well settled law that clarifications on Import Policy issued by office of DGFT is binding on Customs as f....