DEVENDRA H VEECUMSEE Vs. COLLECTOR OF CENTRAL EXCISE
LAWS(CE)-1986-10-9
CUSTOMS EXCISE AND GOLD(CONTROL) APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
Decided on October 24,1986

Appellant
VERSUS
Respondents

JUDGEMENT

S. Kalyanam, Member (J) - (1.)THIS appeal is directed against the order of the Collector of Central Excise (Appeals), Madras dated 9.12.198.5 confirming the finding of the Dy. Collector of Central Excise, Madras dated 23.4.1985 rejecting the appellant's application for issue of a licence under Rule 2(f) of the Gold Control (Licensing of Dealers) Rules, 1969.
(2.)Shri Suganchand Jain, the learned Counsel for the appellant submitted that the appellant has been granted a licence by the authorities in form G.S.8-A in terms of proviso (c) to Rule 2(f) of the Gold Control (Licensing of Dealers) Rules, 1969. The said licence entitles the appellant to export out of India articles or ornaments in conformity with the statutory requirements. In order to fulfil the objective of the licence, the learned counsel contended that it is absolutely necessary that the appellant will have to manufacture ornaments, buy ornaments and gold, deliver the gold or ornaments to goldsmiths or artisans for manufacture of ornaments and in such a situation unless the appellant is granted a domestic licence it would defeat the very purpose for which a licence for export of ornaments has been granted in favour of the appellant. The learned Counsel further urged that even though this plea was specifically taken by him before the Collector of Central Excise (Appeals), the same has not been considered at all in the impugned order.
Shri Bhatia, the learned SDR urged that inasmuch as the plea of the learned counsel has not been considered in the impugned order the matter may be remitted back for reconsideration by the authorities below.

(3.)WE have considered the submissions of the parties herein. Rule 2(f) proviso (c) of the Gold Control (Licensing of Dealers) Rules, 1969 is to the effect that a person who desires to export out of India articles or ornaments or both shall take out an application and the same could be considered and licence granted by the authorities as per law. In the instant case the appellant has admittedly been granted such a licence for export of ornaments outside India. WE also perused the Licence No. 2/86(Export) issued in this connection in favour of the appellant. The question that would arise for consideration is whether in order to fulfil the export objective a licensee holding an export licence could manufacture ornaments through artisans or certified goldsmiths, issue vouchers in connection therewith without a separate licence in terms of the licence granted under Rule 2(f) of the Gold Control (Licensing of Dealers) Rules, 1969. The learned counsel urged that the issue voucher book with the seal of the authorities was not granted to the appellant and, therefore, the licence granted in favour of the appellant for export of jewellery has become inoperative or unusable. WE find that a plea has been taken by the learned Counsel in Ground No. 3 in the appeal before the Collector of Central Excise (Appeals). Since the point as set out by us above has not been adverted to and considered in the impugned order by the Collector (Appeals) and as original authority also has not dealt with this point presumably because it was not urged before him, in the interests of justice the matter is remitted back to the original authority for reconsideration of the matter as per law in the light of the observations set out above.


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.