Case Laws
Acts
Notifications
Circulars
Classification
Forms
Manuals
Articles
News
D. Forum
Highlights
Notes
🚨 Important Update for Our Users
We are transitioning to our new and improved portal - www.taxtmi.com - for a better experience.
⚠️ This portal will be fully migrated on 31-July-2025 at 23:59:59
After this date, all services will be available exclusively on our new platform.
If you encounter any issues or problems while using the new portal,
please let us know
via our feedback form
, with specific details, so we can address them promptly.
Home
2011 (8) TMI 1064 - AT - CustomsEnhancement of Redemption fine and penalty - import of restricted goods without valid import licence repeatedly - Digital Multifunctional print and copier machines - Held that - On careful reading of the explanatory notes under the HSN we find that the photocopiers are specifically arranged under the head of copying machines and the said head does not include the machines which are capable to perform two or more functions of printing copying or facsimile etc. There is a clear cut identification and separate head for combination of printers copying machines or facsimile machines in the HSN explanatory notes. In view of this it is very clear that photocopier machines are understood as copying machines while the imported goods fall separately under the category of combinations of printers copying machines of facsimile machines. It is not in dispute in this case that the imported goods are combination of printers copying machines and/or facsimile machines. Hence the digital multifunction print & copier machines cannot be termed as photocopiers to attract the bar of Para 2.17 of the FTP. As the adjudicating authority has found that the machines in question are capable of additional functions such as printing etc. when connected to a computer although confiscation and penalty is to be sustained in the absence of any appeal by the importers against confiscation and penalty no justification exists for enhancement in the quantum of fine in lieu of confiscation and penalty - Further there is no finding that the importers had made any payment over and above the invoice value and the value arrived at by the Chartered Engineer is only an estimated value and in his report in the case of imports made by M/s. Digitech Systems M/s. S.S. Enterprises M/s. Indicon Copier Services it is stated that the subject goods are required to be modified/reconditioned for further use. He also stated that the estimated margin of profit varies between 20-25% that the price of the second-hand goods varies depending upon the market conditions demand availability of spares etc. All these are conditional factors to be kept in view while fixing quantum of fine and penalty and would justify reduction as done by the lower appellate authority. Also respondents are first time importers and not repeated offenders so as to justify the enhancement in fine and penalty. Eenhancement in the quantum of fine and penalty not justified - appeal dismissed - decided against Revenue.
|