TMI Blog2010 (12) TMI 326X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... dal, J. REPRESENTED BY : Shri Vishal Agarwal, C.A., for the Appellant. Shri V.K. Singh, SDR, for the Respondent. [Order]. - This appeal is directed against the order of confiscation of the goods in question with an option to redeem the same on payment of fine of Rs. 2 lakhs and a penalty of Rs. 50,000/- also imposed on the ground that the imported goods were the consumer goods and were not covered under the REP licences produced by the appellant. 2. The facts of the case are that the appellant had imported TV Broadcast 85 Studio Equipment and sought their clearance against REP licences bearing Nos. 3361987 and 3245612 as per para 177(2) of AM 1988-91 Policy. The said clearance was refused by the Customs authorities on the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 3 (S.C.). (ii) The TV broadcast studio equipment imported by the petitioner were capital goods covered by para 177(2) of AM 1988-91. The contention of the Revenue that the said goods were covered under Entry No. 148 of Appendix 2 (Part B) of AM 1988-91 which covers all electrical equipment/systems howsoever described (including consumer and professional type) was not correct. It was further held that even assuming that the goods were under Entry 148, the import of the same was not banned and the same would not cease to be capital goods and the import of which is permitted against REP licence in terms of para 177(2) of AM 1988-91. 4. On the other hand the learned SDR submitted that the decision of the Hon ble High Court is not rel ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 88-91 policy which reads All electronic equipment/systems howsoever described (including consumer or professional type), excluding those specifically allowed under OGL in this policy or specified elsewhere. The Hon ble High Court has in its judgment in para 10 clearly held that the TV broadcast studio equipments are not covered under Sr. No. 148 of Appendix II (B). Accordingly, even if the transitional provisions were applied, the goods imported by the appellant were covered in Appendix II-Part B of the policy as alleged and hence were eligible to benefit of REP licences even in terms of the transitional provisions. 6. Heard and considered. 7. On careful examination of the submissions made by both the sides, I find that the Hon ble ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... which had arise for its consideration. The question No. 1 was (1) The import policy of which year would be applicable to the present case - the period during which the licences were issued or the time when the import actually took place . In paragraph No. 3 of the decision, the Supreme Court held that the High Court had come to the correct conclusion to the terms of import policy of 1980-81 (i.e. period during which the licence was issued) would apply. In view of the decision of the Supreme Court, we have no doubt that the import in question which was effected in pursuance of a REP licence dated 13th December 1990, would be governed by the import export policy AM 1988-91 . 10. Mr. Jetly, learned counsel for the applicant submitted th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
