- (1.)THE appellants imported used clothes which were actually gifts from a U.K. Donor Organisation namely M/s. Friends of Ludhiana based at U.K. The appellants fulfilled conditions of Sl. No. 1 of the Table annexed to the Notification No. 148/94 -Cus. In terms of the Notification, there are conditions to be fulfilled, so that the goods could be imported free of duty. The fulfilment of these conditions is not in dispute, therefore, there is no need to discuss them.
(2.)THE learned Counsel who appeared for the appellants informed the Bench that in terms of Sl. No. 5 to the Table Annexed to the Notification when the goods are imported from U.K. which has entered into a bilateral agreement with India with regard to the import of gifts items, there is a condition that the goods have to be imported only through specified ports. The Revenue authorities have applied this condition to the said goods imported at Visakhapatnam. It is also pointed out that Visakhapatnam is not one of the specified ports. However, later Visakhapatnam has also been included. It is the contention of the learned Counsel that Sl. No. 1 and Sl. No. 5 in the Table annexed to the Notification are independent. He also pointed out the earlier instances wherein appellants were allowed such imports under Sl. No. 1 of the Table annexed to the Notification at Visakhapatnam Custom House. The following are the Bills of Entry particulars of the past imports which have been allowed by the customs.
Sl. No.B.E.No./Dt./cc/Typ

1.801761/13/06/2005/N/H [B.L.No.OSA P 93240 dated 23 -5 -05]

2.802016/01/07/2005/N/H [B.L.No.OSA 503840 dated 8 -4 -05]

3.604692/11/09/2006/N/H [B.L. No. APLU 005735036 dated 20 -8 -06]

4.603676/17/07/2006/N/H [B.L. No. APLU 005734174 dated 27 -6 -06]

5.606666/18/12/2006/N/H [B.L. No. APLU 005794674 dated 27 -11 -06]

6.100078/04/01/2007/N/H [B.L. No. APLU 005794708 dated 11 -12 -06]

7.112903/22/05/2007/N/H [B.L. No. APLU 005738014 dated 23 -4 -07]

(3.)THE learned Departmental Representative stated that the imports are from U.K. and therefore, the bilateral agreement and the attendant conditions have to be respected and implemented. Hence, she was of the view that the impugned order is legal and proper.
On a very careful consideration of the matter, I find that the goods have been received as gifts for free distribution to the needy and poor irrespective of caste, creed or religion. There have been earlier instances where the authorities had allowed the import in terms of Sl. No. 1 of the Table annexed to the Notification. As the Sl. Nos. 1 and 5 are independent, in the present case also there should not have been any objection in allowing the imports. Hence, there is no justification for denying the said imports on the ground that Visakhapatnam Port is not specified. As far as the conditions specified in Sl. No. 1 to the Table are concerned, there is no requirement of any specified port. When there are two different provisions, the one which is beneficial to the importer is normally adopted. Taking such a view of things, I allow the appeal with consequential relief.