1999 (5) TMI 35

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....Sri Ashok Haranahalli, Adv. ORDER V.K. Singhal, J. The petitioner has claimed a refund of Rs. 91,908/- in respect of the machineries imported and re-exported in accordance with the provisions of Section 74 of the Customs Act. It is undisputed that the said equipments were imported by the petitioner for exhibition and demonstration and thereafter, re-exported. Under sub-section (1) of Sect....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... placed on the judgment given in the case of ABC India Ltd. v. Union of India [1992 (61) E.L.T. 205 (Del.)]. 3. Arguments of both the learned Counsel for the parties heard. 4. The short point to be decided is as to whether demonstration and exhibition of the machinery/equipment amounts to use of the goods. 5. The Assistant Collector of Customs found that the instruments were used during e....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....at, when once the goods were out of Customs charge, it is neither practical nor possible for the Customs authorities to know the exact nature and extent of use to which such goods are put. Use for demonstration was also considered as a use. 6. There is a difference between display and demonstration. It is not the case of the petitioner that the machineries imported were kept in tact and were no....