1. Claim for concessional duty under Item 72-A of the Customs Tariff — Registration of contract under Project Import (Registration of Contracts) Regulation, 1965. (Para 1 )
Back
Next 
1997 Supreme(SC) 1277
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
B.N.Kirpal : S.C.Agrawal
Dunlop India Limited, Calcutta
Versus
Collector Of Customs, Calcutta
Case No. : 139 of 1986
Date of Decision : 9/25/97
To avail of concessional duty under project imports, the import contract must be registered with the Customs Authorities prior to the clearance of the goods.
Headnote:(A) Customs Tariff - Item 72-A - Project Import (Registration of Contracts) Regulation, 1965 - Concessional duty - Registration of contract - If the project import contract with the buyer is not registered with the Customs Authorities prior to clearance of goods, the benefit of the concessional duty cannot be granted. (Para 1)
Facts of the case:
The appellant sought the benefit of concessional duty under the relevant tariff item. However, the contract had not been registered as required by the applicable regulations before the clearance of the goods. It was found that the goods had already arrived before the application for registration was submitted by the appellant.
Findings of Court:
The court held that the Tribunal rightly denied the benefit of the concessional duty, as the registration of the contract was not completed prior to the clearance of the goods, which is a prerequisite under the law.
Issues: Whether the appellant was entitled to the benefit of concessional duty under Item 72-A of the Customs Tariff despite the failure to register the contract prior to the clearance of the goods.
Ratio Decidendi: The benefit of concessional duty for project imports is contingent upon the registration of the import contract with the Customs Authorities before the goods are cleared.
Result: Appeal dismissed with costs.
Legal Category Hierarchy
-
customs law
-
customs tariff
-
project imports
- concessional duty (Para 1)
-
project imports
-
customs tariff
Table of Contents
2. Whether concessional duty is available if the project import contract is not registered with Customs Authorities prior to the clearance of goods. (Para 1 )
3. The court observed that the goods arrived before the registration application was submitted, justifying the denial of concessional duty. (Para 1 )
4. Benefit of concessional duty cannot be granted if the project import contract is not registered with Customs Authorities prior to clearance of goods. (Para 1 )
5. Appeal dismissed with costs. (Para 1 )
6. When must a project import contract be registered to qualify for concessional duty?
The project import contract with the buyer must be registered with the Customs Authorities prior to the clearance of the goods to be eligible for the benefit of concessional duty. (Para 1 )
7. Does the arrival of goods before the submission of a registration application affect the claim for concessional duty?
Yes, if the registration of the project import contract is not completed prior to the clearance of goods, the benefit of concessional duty cannot be granted. (Para 1 )
S.C.AGRAWAL, J.
(1) THE only question that falls for consideration in this appeal is whether the appellant was entitled to the benefit of concessional duty under Item 72-A of the Customs Tariff. The said benefit has been denied to the appellant on the view that the contract had not been registered as required by the Project Import (Registration of Contracts) Regulation, 1965 before the clearance of the goods. Actually, it has been found that the goods had already arrived before the application was submitted by the appellant for registration of the goods. The Tribunal, in our opinion, has rightly held that the appellant was not entitled to claim the benefit of the concessional duty and the said view of the Tribunal is in consonance with the law laid down by this Court in Mihir Textiles Ltd. v. Collector of Customs wherein it has been laid down that if the project import contract with the buyer is not registered with the Customs Authorities prior to clearance of goods, the benefit of the concessional duty cannot be granted. The appeal is, therefore, dismissed with costs.
