Philips India Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Customs

Philips India Ltd. vs Commissioner of Customs

Type Court Judgment Court Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai Decided Nov 21, 2002

~1 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/29414

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

Citation: sooperkanoon.com/29414
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Judge: K Kumar, S T C.
Decided On: Nov 21, 2002
Subject: Customs

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

Customs

Key legal issue: Customs

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Philips India Ltd.

Respondent

Commissioner of Customs

Legal References

Reported In: (2003)(159)ELT792Tri(Mum.)bai

Excerpt

2. shri. m.p. sendo, learned j.d.r. appearing on behalf of the revenue submitted that the appellants have failed to comply with the condition as given in notification no. 88/94-cus., dated 1-3-94. therefore, his submission is that there is no merits in the appeal filed by the appellant and the commissioner (appeals) has rightly dismissed the appeal filed before him on the limited ground that benefit under notification no. 88/94 is conditional, requiring an undertaking to be given by the importer at the time of import, that the imported goods would be used for manufacture of the listed item i.e. graphite of resistive composition. the exemption is available on that precondition.as the catalogue was not submitted at the material time, the characteristic and the nature of the goods could not be determined.this was a pre-condition to the benefit which have been forfeited by not fulfilling the condition at the time of clearance itself.therefore, the appellants have no case in their favour.3. after hearing the learned j.d.r. and perusal of the records, we find no merit in the appeal. as such the appeal is dismissed.

Full Judgment

2. Shri. M.P. Sendo, learned J.D.R. appearing on behalf of the Revenue submitted that the appellants have failed to comply with the condition as given in Notification No. 88/94-Cus., dated 1-3-94. Therefore, his submission is that there is no merits in the appeal filed by the appellant and the Commissioner (Appeals) has rightly dismissed the appeal filed before him on the limited ground that benefit under Notification No. 88/94 is conditional, requiring an undertaking to be given by the importer at the time of import, that the imported goods would be used for manufacture of the listed item i.e. Graphite of Resistive Composition. The exemption is available on that precondition.

As the catalogue was not submitted at the material time, the characteristic and the nature of the goods could not be determined.

This was a pre-condition to the benefit which have been forfeited by not fulfilling the condition at the time of clearance itself.

Therefore, the appellants have no case in their favour.

3. After hearing the learned J.D.R. and perusal of the records, we find no merit in the appeal. As such the appeal is dismissed.

Same Court & Year Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumb... Same Parties Philips India Ltd. vs Commissioner of Customs Same Subject Customs Same Judge K Kumar, S T C.