HYDERABAD BATTERIES LTD Vs. COLLECTOR OF CUSTOMS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is an appeal directed against the Order of the Additional Collector of Customs, Bombay, bearing No. S/10-183/83 F, dated 30-7-1983.

(2.) Brief facts for the purpose of disposal of this appeal can be stated as below:

(3.) SHRI S.B. Patil, the learned Consultant, on behalf of the appellants, stated that the suppliers had wrongly described the goods as wire cloth in their invoice. He referred to the clarification received from the manufacturers to the effect that the material is a special mesh used in the manufacture of nickel cadmium batteries, for which purpose cold bonded mesh is needed. Wire cloth is not suitable for such battery purpose because it cannot carry high currents. He also took us through their letter dated 21-2-1979 addressed to the Dy. Chief Controller of Imports & Exports, Hyderabad with reference to the import of nickel mesh and also the clarification dated 22-3-1979 from the office of the Controller of Imports & Exports, clarifying that the item does not figure in Appendix 3 or 5 of ITC Policy 1978-79 . . . can be imported under OGL. He also referred to the letter from the Director of Industries dated 23-2-1979 in response to their application for issue of essentiality certificate for import of raw material, namely nickel powder, cellophone, nylon separator, nickel strip, nickel mesh etc. In this letter the Director of Industries has stated that the case has been examined with reference to ITC Policy and the item in respect of which essentiality certificate has been asked, do not fall under Appendix 3 or 5 or under Appendix 8 and was allowed import under OGL as per procedure laid down under Appendix 10 of the Policy. In view of this clarification received prior to import, they had in all bona fide imported the goods under OGL. He also contended that the goods imported are bonded mesh and not woven wire cloth. In the case of test seives as per I.S.I., the material used are phospher bronze, brass, mild steel, stainless steel etc. and in this case the goods imported are of nickel ply bonded mesh. Only the mesh for test seives and wire cloth for test seives are said to be covered by Appendix 3. In this case, the goods imported are for the manufacture of batteries and hence Customs Dept. ought not to have applied serial 502 of Appendix 3, but allowed clearance under OGL, especially in the context of clarification received by the appellant, even prior to import. He also submitted that subsequent to the adjudication M/s. Punjab Power Packs Ltd. (A Government of Punjab Undertaking) had specifically sought for clarification in respect of nickel wire mesh supplied by M/s. National Standard, Woven Products Division, USA. This clarification was specifically asked in respect of disputed consignment under appeal. In this context he referred to the letter dated 24-9-1985 from M/s. Punjab Power Packs Limited. In reply to this letter, the DGTD, by their letter dated 31-1986, have given clarification that the import of nickel wire mesh is covered under entry No. 1 of Appendix 10 of Import Export Policy 1982-83 subject to the conditions laid down therein. He, therefore, contended that in the light of the clarification received from the DGTD and also the earlier clarification by the office of the CCIE which was binding on the department, the goods should be allowed under OGL.