LAWS(SC)-2011-1-99

COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS Vs. STONEMAN MARBLE INDUSTRIES

Decided On January 21, 2011
COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS Appellant
V/S
STONEMAN MARBLE INDUSTRIES Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Delay in SLP (C) No. 11177 of 2006, SLP (C) No. 11180 of 2006, SLP (C) No. 11181 of 2006, SLP (C) No. 11182 of 2006, SLP (C) No. 12641 of 2006 and SLP (C) No. 14991 of 2006 is condoned and Leave granted.

(2.) Challenge in this batch of appeals is to the orders passed by the High Court of Bombay dated 3rd July, 2003 in Customs Application Nos. 27-29, 31, 34, 36 of 2002 and 2-10 of 2003; 24 th March, 2005 in Customs Application Nos. 17-18 of 2003; 30th March, 2005 in Customs Application Nos. 26 and 29 of 2003; 16th March, 2005 in Customs Application Nos. 11-14 of 2003; 6 th April, 2005 in Customs Application Nos. 31-33 and 35 of 2003 and 23rd March, 2005 in Customs Application Nos. 15-16 of 2003. By the impugned orders, the High Court has rejected the applications filed by the Revenue under Section 130A of the Customs Act, 1962 (for short "the Act") on the ground that no question of law arose from the orders of the Customs, Excise and Gold (Control) Appellate Tribunal (for short "the Tribunal").

(3.) As common questions of law and facts are involved in all the appeals, these are being disposed of by this common judgment. However, to appreciate the controversy involved, a brief reference to the facts in C.A.Nos.4371-4383 of 2004, as being illustrative, would suffice. The Respondents-importers were engaged in the business of import of rough marble blocks, classifiable under sub-heading 2515.12 of the Customs Tariff Act, 1975, from various countries such as Italy, Iran, Turkey, Indonesia, Spain, China, Greece etc. in the year 1999. These goods were covered by Exim Code No. 25151200 of ITC (HS) Classification of Export & Import Items 1997-2002, and required a specific licence for importation under the EXIM Policy-1997-2002. Admittedly, when the imports were made all the Respondents, in the instant cases, did not possess the licence as required under the EXIM Policy. Additionally, in some cases, the quantity and price of the imported goods was mis-declared in the bills of entry.