TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2006 (8) TMI 181
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....eismic surveys. The information gathered by reason of such survey was recorded in 3-D Seismic Tapes. 2. A question arose as to whether the same would attract the exemptions from payment of custom duty in terms of the entries contained in Sl. Nos. 182, 184 and 231 of the notification, dated 28-2-1999. 3. For the aforementioned purpose, indisputably, an essentiality certificate was required to be issued by the Directorate General of Hydrocarbons. Pre-requisites for grant of such certificate also was a valid Petroleum Exploration licence. 4. The licence granted by the Central Government in favour of the Appellant in that behalf was initially valid up to 14-11-1997. The Appellant applied for renewal thereof on 7-10-1997. An application....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....s Tullow could produce the essentiality certificate before the Tribunal, the Appellant could not. 7. The matter came up before this Court at the instance of the Appellant. It filed an application for urging additional grounds inter alia relying on or on the basis of the said Essentiality Certificate granted in its favour on 26-3-2004. This Court, opining that grant of essentiality certificate should be treated to be a proof of the fact that the Appellants had fulfilled the conditions enabling them to obtain the benefits under the aforementioned exemption notification, remitted the matter to the Commissioner for consideration thereof afresh having regard to the similar directions issued by the Tribunal in the case of Tullow. 8. Pursuan....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... further attributed malice on the part of the Directorate General of Hydrocarbons stating that such essentiality certificate was granted in order to facilitate the Appellant's case before this Court observing : "In the above background, the EC dated 26-3-2004 cannot be accepted because, (i) ONGC were not eligible for the EC on the date of import of the data tapes; (ii) No application for the EC was pending with the DGHC on the date of import of the data tapes (in fact, the application had been rejected) (iii) The EC dt. 26-3-2004 was a solicited document, solicited for the sole purpose of winning the case befo....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....not is a subject matter of separate proceedings)." 11. It further opined that another reason why the Appellant disentitled itself from grant of the benefit of the said exemption notification was that production of the essentiality certificate was necessary at the time of importation and not thereafter. 12. The Appellant is a public sector undertaking. The exemption notification inter alia was issued in its favour by the Central Government. It may be true that on the date when the goods were provisionally cleared the Appellant did not have the essentiality certificate with it, but this Court in its judgment dated 28th October, 2005 [since reported in (2005) 13 SCC 789] categorically held that in a case of this nature, unless a final or....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....al matrix obtaining therein. We, therefore, are unable to agree with the opinion of the learned Commissioner that the Appellant made any misrepresentation before this Court or that the Directorate General of Hydrocarbons had shown any favour to it. Once it is held that the Ministry of Petroleum had renewed the licence and the Directorate General of Hydrocarbons had issued the essentiality certificate, the conditions precedent for obtaining exemption in terms of the exemption notification stood fully satisfied. 15. This Court, times without number, has construed such exemption notifications in liberal manner. [See Commissioner of Customs (Imports), Mumbai v. Tullow India Operations Ltd., (2005) 13 SCC 789, [See Tata Iron & Steel Co. Ltd. ....