TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
1980 (10) TMI 70
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....r than 21 to 25G" of the value of C.I.F. in Rs. 1,00,000/-. The licence dated February 5, 1966 was granted by the Iron and Steel Controller under the Government of India, late Ministry of Commerce and Industry order No. 17/55, dated December 7, 1955 issued under the Imports and Exports (Control) Act, 1947. The licence was for the licensing period April to June, 1965 and was valid for shipping up to February 28, 1967. On the basis of the said licence, the petitioner imported stainless steel sheets of the value of Rs. 99,715/- from Japan. When the goods arrived in India, it was found that they were stainless steel sheets of 22 gauge the import of which was not permitted under the licence granted to the petitioner. The petitioners were served ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....en committed. The Collector of Customs confiscated the goods under Section Ill(d) of the Customs Act, 1962. The petitioners were given an option under Section 125 of the Customs Act, 1962 in lieu of confiscation to clear the goods for home consumption on payment of a fine of Rs. 50,000/-. The petitioners paid the fine and cleared the goods for home consumption. The appeal of the petitioners under Section 128 of the Customs Act, 1962 was dismissed by the second impugned order dated September 30, 1967. The Revision Petition filed under Section 131 of the Customs Act, 1962 was dismissed by the third impugned order dated January 27, 1969. 4. It is not disputed and cannot be disputed that the description of the goods mentioned in the import l....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... clarifies the intention of the Government to permit the import of stainless steel only for the purpose of surgical instruments, hospital equipment and ancilliaries. This letter was brought to the notice of the petitioners at the time of hearing of the appeal by the Central Board of Excise and Customs when the petitioners contended that the licensing policy prevailing at the time of issue of the licence contained no gauge restriction of the import of stainless steel sheet and that the gauge restriction mentioned in the licence was an error. An inference is recorded by the Appellate Authority that Stainless steel sheets of 21-25 gauge are known to be utensil grade sheets and as such they were not licensable at the relevant time. It is thus c....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... that they did not intend and under no circumstances use these sheets for manufacturing utensils or other consumable articles. Reference was also made to paragraphs 6 and 12 of the counter affidavit wherein it is stated that it was never the case of the petitioner at any stage of the adjudication proceedings or even in the present petition that they intended to use the goods for the manufacture of hospital equipment and surgical instruments only and that they did not intend to use the goods imported for them for the manufacture of utensils and other domestic wares. The Counsel submits that the authorities under the Act have not taken into consideration the categorical stand of the petitioners of the end use of the imported articles and, the....