Chartered Accountant
Bookmark and Share
click here to subscribe our newsletter
 
 
Corporate News *   CBIC issues draft rules for Customs valuation *  Top Headlines: Threshold for Benami deals, green bond investors, and more *  Govt aims 1-hour clearance for goods at all ports *  Exporters Allowed To Use RoDTEP, RoSCTL Scrips To Pay Customs Duty, Transfer Them; Rules Amended *  Millions of labourers to be affected by brick producers’ strike over hike in GST, coal rates *  Inauguration of ‘kendriya GST parisar’ *  Transporter can seek Release of Conveyance alone, not Goods under GST Act: Madras HC *  GST: Quoting of DIN Mandatory for Responding to Notice, Govt Modifies Portal *  Firms can soon file claims for GST credits of ?400 cr *  CBIC issues modalities for filing transitional credit under GST. *  Mumbai: Man creates 36 fake GST firms, arrested for input tax credit fraud of Rs 23 cr *  Report to restructure Commerce Ministry under study; idea is to set up trade promotion body: Goyal *  Firms can soon file claims for GST credits of ?400 cr *  Gambling Alert! Govt May Levy Up To 28% GST; UP, Bengal Back Move *  EPFO backs raising retirement age to ease pressure on pension funds *  India Moving Up Power Scale, Set to Become Third Largest Economy By 2030 *  Airfares Get Expensive: What Changes for Flyers From Today? *  IRCTC Latest News: Passengers to Pay More For Cancelling Confirmed Rail Tickets Soon. *  IBC prevails over Customs Act, says Supreme Court. *  As GST enters sixth year, a time for evaluation and reassessment *  There’s GST on daily essentials as Centre needs money to buy MLAs: Arvind Kejriwal *  Now, GST on cancellation of confirmed train tickets, hotel bookings *  GST kitty for top States could rise 20% in FY23, says Crisil *  French customs officials seize another cargo vessel over Russia sanctions *  TradeLens builds on Asia momentum with Pakistan Customs deal *  Hike tax on tobacco, reduce affordability & increase revenue: Civil society organizations to GST council *  Bihar: ?10 crore tax evasion on tobacco products detected in raids *  Centre failed on GST, COVID; would it be anti-national? Rajan on Infosys row *  Service Tax not Chargeable on Income Tax TDS portion paid by recipient: CESTAT grants relief to TVS *  Foreign portfolio investors make net investment of Rs 7575cr in Sep so far
Subject News *  Run-up to Budget: Monetary threshold for GST offences may rise to Rs 25 cr *   GST (Tax) E-invoice Must For Businesses With Over Rs 5 Crore Annual Turnover *   Both Central GST and excise duty can be imposed on tobacco, rules Karnataka high court *   CBIC Issues Clarification On Extended Timelines For GST Compliance *   CBIC Issues Clarification On Extended Timelines For GST Compliance *  Budget 2023- 9.6 crore gas connections *  GST: Tamil Nadu Issues Instructions for Assessment and Adjudication Proceedings *  GST: CBIC Extends Last Date for filing of ITC *  GST collection in September surpasses Rs 1.4 lakh crore for straight seventh time *  Dollar smuggling case: Customs chargesheet names M Sivasankar as key conspirator. *  Hike in GST rates fuels inflation *  Assam: CBI arrests GST commissioner in Guwahati *  GST fraud worth ?824cr by 15 insurance Cos detected *  India proposes 15% customs duties on 22 items imported from UK *  Decriminalising certain offences under GST on cards *  Surge in GST collections more due to higher inflation: India Ratings *  MNRE Notifies BCD and Hike in GST Rates as ‘Change in Law’ Events But With a Condition | Mercom India *   Solar projects awarded before customs duty change allowed cost pass-through *  Rajasthan High Court Dismisses Writ Petitions Challenging Levy Of GST On Royalty *   GST revenue in September likely at Rs 1.45 lakh crore *  Govt working on decriminalising certain offences under GST, lower compounding charge *  Building an institution like GST Council takes time, trashing is easy: Sitharaman *  GST collections in Sept may touch ?1.5 lakh crore *  KTR asks Centre to withdraw GST on handlooms *  After Gameskraft, More Online Gaming Startups To Receive GST Tax Claims *  Madras HC: AAR Application Filed Under VAT Does Not Survive After GST Enactment *  Threshold for criminal offences under GST law may be raised *  Bengaluru: Gaming company faces biggest GST notice of Rs 21,000 crore *  CBIC clarifies Classification of Cranes for GST, Customs Duty *  Customs seize gold hidden in bicycle in Kerala airport  

Comments

Print   |    |  Comment

PJ/Case Laws/2010-11/1163

Entitlement to import of Marble quota - fulfillment of prescribed conditions

Case: Akash Universal Ltd, Mumbai v/s Union of India
 
Citation: 2011-TIOL-281-HC-MUM-EXIM
 
Issue:- Entitlement to marble quota- The difference between CA certificate and Balance Sheet figures does not affect the entitlement criteria- quota is allowed.
 
Brief Facts:- Petitioner is a public limited company having their registered office at Mumbai and their factory at Silvassa. They are engaged in manufacture of marble tiles and marble slabs falling under Chapter 25. The goods are manufactured by the petitioner mostly out of imported marble blocks.
 
Restriction has been placed on the import of marble blocks imported into India under Foreign Trade Policy read with Licensing Notes to Chapter 25 of ITC-HS and import is allowed only under a licence. Petitioner was granted licences for import of marble blocks for last many years. Guidelines for issuance of licence to import marble blocks for the year 2010-11 was notified vide DGFT Notification No.36/2009-14 dated 31.3.2010 and DGFT Circular No. 29/2009-14 dated 31.3.2010.
 
The petitioner had also applied to the Joint DGFT, Mumbai on 3.4.2010 for issuance of licence to import marble blocks in terms of the said Notification read with Circular dated 31.3.2010. However, the petitioner’s application for issuance of licence to import marble blocks for the year 2010-11 was rejected by the Respondent No. 2 - the Director General of Foreign Trade (DGFT) vide communication dated 10.5.2010.
 
Petitioner has challenged the non-grant of licences to them.
 
Petitioner’s Contention: - Petitioner pointed out that their application was rejected merely on the ground that there was a discrepancy in the domestic sales turnover shown in the Schedule H of the balance sheet filed with the R.O.C. for the year 2005-06 and 2006-07 and the domestic sales turnover shown in the Chartered Accountant’s Certificate (CAC).
 
Respondent’s Contention:- Respondent submitted that in the CAC for the relevant years the figure of high seas sales turnover has been included which is not permissible and that there was a deliberate attempt on the part of the petitioner to give an inflated turnover figure for the purpose of import quota under the policy for the import of rough marbles.
 
Reasoning of Judgment:- The High Court perused Notification No. 36/2009-14 dated 31.3.2010 which lays down the eligibility criteria to be satisfied by the units for obtaining licence to import marble. It was observed that it was an admitted position that the petitioner has two gang saw machines installed in their factory. The petitioner’s eligibility criteria of domestic sales turnover on annual basis of marble blocks/tiles which is Rs. 1 crore is also satisfied as the petitioner’s annual turnover in the previous years is more than Rs. 16 crores and the average turnover during the last five years works out to Rs. 25 crores. Thus, the petitioner was an eligible unit and their entitlement is to the extent of 4500 MT of marble blocks as per the said Notification.
 
The High Court noted that the discrepancy stated is that instead of furnishing domestic sales turnover, the total turnover has been furnished. Admittedly, the domestic sales turnover achieved during the years in question is much more than the prescribed domestic sales turnover of Rs. 1 Crore. Therefore, notwithstanding the discrepancy in domestic sales turnover as per the balance-sheet filed with R.O.C. for the financial years 2005-06 and 2006-07 and the CA Certificate, it cannot be disputed that the petitioner was infact entitled for allocation of import quota for import of rough marble blocks as per Notification No. 36/2009-14 dated 31.3.2010 inasmuch as in both the years the domestic sales turnover was shown to be more than 22 crores which is way beyond the entitlement criteria of Rs. 1 crore of annual domestic sales turnover of the marble blocks. Thus, the discrepancy, if any, in submitting the domestic sales turnover inclusive of the high seas sales turnover of about Rs. 2 Crores which was incorrectly included in the CA Certificate, does not affect the merits of the case of the petitioner. It is noticed that the petitioner in their letter dated 28.4.2010 had however clearly set out the break-up of domestic sales figures alongwith high seas sales turnover separately. As such, it cannot be said that there was any attempt on the part of the petitioner to suppress any fact or to furnish inflated figures. In any event, it cannot be said that by inflating the figures, the petitioner’s entitlement to the import quota would in any manner have been affected. At best, it can be only said to be negligence on the part of the petitioner for which the petitioner cannot be penalised by denying him the import quota.
 
It was noted that the Respondent-Union of India also does not dispute the position that the petitioner would not have gained any additional benefit by showing inflated figures from Rs. 22 crores (approx.)to Rs. 24 crores (approx.) in the CA Certificate and that their entitlement would not have been in any manner affected on that count.
 
The High Court also noted the observations of the Director General of Foreign Trade in his order dated 29.7.2010 which was passed pursuant to the show cause notice dated 19.5.2010 issued to the petitioner for imposition of penalty and suspension/cancellation of IEC code u/s. 8 of the said Act for mis-declaration. It was held that thus, even according to the DGFT, by increasing the figures of the domestic sales turnover, there would have been no change in the entitlement of the petitioner and no malafide intention could be ascribed to them and that the mis-declaration on the part of the petitioner may be on account of negligence or carelessness. The DGFT has proceeded to impose a token penalty of Rs. 1 lakh on the petitioner in pursuance of the show cause notice.
 
Petitioner stated before the High Court that the petitioner is only interested in the import licence for the import quota and that they are not pressing their prayer to set aside the order dated 29.7.2010 imposing penalty of Rs. 1 lakh, (which is paid by them under protest) if the petitioner is granted the important licence. The HC accepted the statements of the petitioner.
 
The High Court held that the DGFT was not justified in rejecting the petitioner’s application for issuance of licence. Accordingly, the impugned communication dated 10.5.2010 and the subsequent communications dated 19.10.2010 and 21.02.2011 reiterating the rejection pursuant to the petitioner’s representations are quashed and set aside. The Respondents are directed to grant the licence for import of marble blocks for the year 2010-11 to the petitioner forthwith.
 
Decision:- Petition allowed. 

*************

Department News


Query

 
PRADEEP JAIN, F.C.A.

Head Office : -

Address :
"SUGYAN", H - 29, SHASTRI NAGAR, JODHPUR (RAJ.) - 342003

Phone No. :
0291 - 2439496, 0291 - 3258496

Mobile No. :
09314722236

Fax No. :0291 - 2439496


Branch Office : -

Address:
1008, 10th FLOOR, SUKH SAGAR COMPLEX,
NEAR FORTUNE LANDMARK HOTEL, USMANPURA,
ASHRAM ROAD, AHMEDABAD-380013

Phone No. :
079-32999496, 27560043

Mobile No. :
093777659496, 09377649496

E-mail :pradeep@capradeepjain.com