2009 (8) TMI 77

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....e respondents in not allowing duty free clearance of the said goods under customs exemption Notification No.204/92 dated 19th May 1992. The petitioners goods arrived in the territorial waters of India atleast on 18th November 1993. The petitioner was denied the benefit of the said notification on the ground that the notification dated 25th November 1993 was issued before the goods were cleared for home consumption. By that notification, the goods were deleted from exemption. The Petitioner had filed the Bill of Entry for home consumption in respect of the said goods on 26.11.1998. 3. A reply was filed on behalf of the respondents by Mr.S.S. Kulkarni, Assistant Collector. It is pointed out that the petitioners are the holders of the Duty E....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ebruary 1994. 4. Subsequent to this notification Shri Sanjay Toshniwal, Director of petitioner no.1 has filed an additional affidavit to which is annexed notification no.105 of 1994 - Cus dated 18th March 1994. By the notification certain words were added to the provision added by notification no.183/93 Based on this notification, it is the submission on behalf of the petitioner that they were entitled to the benefit of notification no.204 of 1992. 5. Learned counsel for the petitioner has drawn our attention to the judgment of the learned Division Bench of the Andhra Pradesh High Court in  S.K. Pharmaceuticals Vs. Union of India 2004 (173) ELC 14 (AP) to contend that in similar circumstances, the learned Bench of the Andhra Prades....