The CESTAT, Chennai bench has held that the restrictions imposed under the DGFT notification dated. 18.12.2019 not applicable to prior import of Gold imported as normal importer.
The appellant, M/s Rajesh Exports Ltd, filed Bill of Entry No. 3682159 dated 20/10/2017 under Notification No. 46/2011, Sl. No. 966 (i) for import of 150 pieces of Gold Bars of purity 99.10% totally weighing 150 Kg falling under Customs Tariff Heading 7108 12 00 of Customs Tariff Act, 1975. The gold was detained and a query was raised to the appellant to clarify the end use of eligibility of import of gold in terms of DGFT Notification No. 34/2017 dated 18/10/2017.
The appellant contended that the show-cause notice but the adjudicating authority absolutely confiscated the imported gold and also imposed a penalty of Rs. 6,00,00,000/- under Section 112 of the Customs Act.
On appeal, the Commissioner set aside the adjudication order of confiscating the gold and imposing penalty but gave a direction to release the imported gold with the condition that the appellant will utilize the same for manufacture and export by themselves. The appellant further challenged the order before the Tribunal contending that although the Airway bill was issued on 17/10/2017 but the goods left the exporting country after 18/10/2017. Therefore, it cannot be said that goods have been imported prior to the date of the Notification. He further submitted that appellant being a Nominated Agency, they have imported the gold and they are bound by end use conditions in terms of Notification No. 34/2017 dated 18/10/20
Judicial Member Ms. Sulekha Beevi observed that as per the Notification dated 18/12/2019, it has been held that after issuance of the Notification dated 18/12/2019, only Nominated agencies can import the gold with end use condition which otherwise means that prior to issuance of the Notification dated 18/12/2019, the gold was also freely importable.
“In view of the above analysis, we hold that prior to the notification dated 18/12/2019, the gold was also freely importable by the Normal importer in terms of RBI Guidelines. 7. In view of the above analysis, we hold that the appellant imported the goods as a normal importer; therefore, the restrictions contained in Notification No. 34/2017 dated 18/10/2017 are not applicable to the appellant and the import has been done prior to introduction of the Notification dated 18/10/2017,” the Tribunal said.
Advocate K.S. Ramaswamy appeared for the appellants.
Subscribe Taxscan Premium to view the JudgmentSupport our journalism by subscribing to Taxscan AdFree. Follow us on Telegram for quick updates.
