MEKASTAR TELEMATICS LTD. Vs. COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE issue involved in this appeal, filed by M/s. Mekastar Telematics Ltd. is whether the Computer Software and Protocol Analyses imported by them, are eligible for exemption under Notification No. 51/96 -Cus., dated 23 -7 -1996 and whether the amendment made in Notification by Notification No. 20/2000 -Cus., dated 1 -3 -2000 is retrospective in effect.

(2.) Shri K. Kumar, ld. Advocate, submitted that the Appellants imported the impugned goods under Bill of Entry No. 793566 dated 20 -7 -1999 from U.S.A. for and on behalf of Telecommunication Engineering Centre, Department of Telecommunication (TEC, in short); that they claimed exemption from payment of Customs duty under Notification No. 51/96 -Cus. which exempts scientific and technical instruments, apparatus, equipments if the importer, Public funded research institution, is registered with the Department of Scientific and Industrial Research; that the Customs cleared the consignment extending the exemption benefit; that subsequently a show cause -notice dated 20 -12 -1999 was issued for denying the benefit of Notification and for demanding customs duty and for imposing penalty; that the Commissioner of Customs, under the impugned order confirmed the demand of Customs duty amounting to Rs. 11,23,113/ - imposed penalty of Rs. 10 lakhs and found the imported goods liable for confiscation under Section 111(m) and (o) of the Customs Act but did not impose any redemption fine as the goods were not liable for confiscation, holding that since the Appellants had imported the goods, they were not eligible to avail the benefit of Notification No. 51/96 -Cus. and that TEC had no authority to issue Customs Duty Certificate.

(3.) THE ld. Advocate, further, submitted that the impugned goods were meant only for TEC which was registered with Department of Scientific & Industrial Research for the purpose of availing exemption of customs duty in terms of Notification No. 51/96; that in Purchase Order it was clearly mentioned that Customs duty was not included in the total price; that the purpose of the Notification should be deemed to have been served as the goods were supplied to TEC; that realizing this aspect the Notification was amended by Notification No. 20/2000 -Cus. wherein the condition now provided is that the "goods are imported by or for delivery to..."; that this amendment is clarificatory in nature and as such will have retrospective effect. He relied upon the decision in Central Machine Tool Institute v. Customs Bangalore, Final Order No. 2570/99 and 4 -10 -1999 [2000 (124) E.L.T. 231 (T)] in which the amendment notification was given effect from the date of the original notification. The ld. Advocate also relied upon the decision in Gujarat Coop. Oil Seeds Growers Ltd. v. C.C.E., Baroda, : 1999 (114) E.L.T. 376 (S.C.) wherein a subsequent Notification was held to be a clarificatory one. Reliance was also placed upon the following decisions :