IMPORTANT POINT
Once it is accepted that there is no more than a provisional assessment at the stage when the contract is registered under the Project Imports (Registration of Contract) Regulations, 1965, it is open to the Customs authorities to make a final assessment taking into account all factors that are relevant thereto, and they are not inhibited by reason of the registration of the contract under the said Regulations.

JUDGMENT

Bharucha, J.-This is an appeal against the judgment and order of the Customs, Excise and Gold (Control) Appellate Tribunal and it concerns the assessment of project imports for the purposes of Customs duty.

2. Prior to the introduction of Item 72A in the earlier Customs Tariff, individual imports, though intended for a single project, were separately assessed to Customs duty. To obviate the inconveniences that resulted, the facility of project imports was introduced and it required that the contract relating to the project import should be registered. The Project Imports (Registration of Contract) Regulations, 1965, were introduced as a consequence. They provide that every importer claiming assessment of articles falling under the relevant entry, being Heading 84.66 of the present Customs Tariff, should apply to the appropriate officer of Customs at the port where the goods are to be imported for registration of his contract. The application in that behalf must specify "such other particulars as may be considered necessary by the Appropriate Officer for the purposes of assessment under the said Heading".

3. The appellants entered into a contract on 19th, December, 1978, with corporations doing business in the United States of America in the style of Hercofina to purchase manufacturing equipment, apparatus, machinery, including spare parts and accessories, comprised in Hercofina s plant at Burlington, New Jersey, USA, for manufacture of Dimethyl Terephthlate (DMT) at the price of US $ 10,000,000.00 (US $ ten million). The appellants applied for registration of the said contract under the Project Import Registration of Contract Regulations, 1965, (hereinafter called "the said Regulations"). On 11th April, 1979, the appellants were informed by the Under Secretary to the Government of India in the Department of Industrial Development, Ministry of Industry that the Government had approved the import by the appellants of the aforesaid capital goods for the production of DMT for the CIF value of US $ 17 million. It was noted in the said letter that the appellants would be incurring as dismantling charges the cost of US $ 5.50 million for which necessary clearance from the Reserve Bank should be obtained. On 21st May, 1979, the Deputy Secretary in the Ministry of Petroleum, Chemicals and Fertilizers required the appellants to furnish a certificate from a firm of Chartered Engineers regarding the soundness and reliability of the aforesaid plant before incurring any expenditure for its purchase. On 1st August, 1981, the Under Secretary in the Department of Economic Affairs in the Ministry of Finance informed the Reserve Bank that the Government had approved the procurement of capital goods, technical assistance, etc., in connection with the DMT project of the appellants thus:

" Value

(i) Import of Capital

goods US $ 17.00 million

(ii) Overseas disman- tling charges etc. US $ 5.5 million

(iii) Fee for Technology & Technical Assistance. US $ 2.5 million."

On 24th August, 1982, the Assistant Collector of Customs, Bombay, informed the appellants that the said contract had been registered and that spares to the extent of 10 per cent of the value of the main machinery were eligible for the concessional rate of assessment under Heading 84.66(II). On 30th September, 1982, the Reserve Bank informed the appellants that it had agreed to the expenditure by the appellants of US $ 5.5 million towards dismantling and other charges in respect of the import of the aforesaid plant, which charges were not required to be endorsed on the import licence issued for that import. On 8th October, 1982, the Joint Controller of Imports and Exports wrote to the Collector of Customs, Bombay, asking the Collector not to debit the said dismantling charges to the face value of the said import licence.