TMI Blog2004 (9) TMI 481X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... adings 9111.30, 9114.30, 9114.90 in BE 2063 9108.99 in BE 2064. The goods were examined, it appeared, to the assessing officers, that goods taken together, in the two BEs, are forming complete watch. Thereby it was considered that 1275 watches of Raymond Weil brand in completely knocked down condition were imported which should be classified under Heading 9107.21/9101.29 and by this modus, it was alleged that the appellant had attempted to evade duty of Rs. 7,60,549/- and since import of watches was restricted and required a licence, and no import licence being produced it was a case of raising liability to confiscation under Section 111(d) and penalty under Section 112. The show cause notice was waived, hearing given and the impugned ord ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... in that case, was not called. The letter Patent Bench, in appeal, held that the decision of the Supreme Court in the case of Girdhari Lal Bansidhar [1964 (7) S.C.R. 62] did not overrule the Anand s case [See U.O.I. v. Tarachand Gupta, 1983 (13) E.L.T. 1456 (S.C.)]. In the case of Sharp Business Machines [1990 (49) E.L.T. 640 (S.C.)], the Apex Court, after examining the facts in that case, of 14 fully semi-finished Plain Paper Copies imported after dismantling them held that when taken together, as imported, on different BEs, there was a violation of the condition of 62% component imports permitted as per the Licence. It was further held that what was not permitted directly cannot be allowed indirectly. They upheld the liability to confiscat ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... on of the law is Sharp Business Machines case was not applicable in the present case, will not help the importers. Since that was a decision arrived at on valuation of the goods and all the imports in that case were not considered as presented, for assessment, at the same time (see paragraph 30 of that order) as is the position in this case. (iv) The now settled position is to assess goods, as entire machines presented for assessment, it cannot be deviated from, if the policy for import of components is free, while that of the entire machine is restricted/prohibited, as in the case of Sharp Business Machines and there is evidence of an attempt to do what is not permitted directly; or Rule 2(a) of the Interpretative Rules is applicab ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
