Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

2012 (11) TMI 639

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... 15 and Canon GP 210 (total 49 Nos.) and Canon X-820 (2 Nos.). They had declared import price of Rs. 150 per set for the 49 pieces and US$ 200 per set for the pieces. 2. Since the goods appeared old and used and the value declared appeared to be low the Customs Officers asked a Chartered Engineer to assess the value of the goods. The Chartered Engineer assessed the price of these goods at $210 instead of $150 declared by the appellant and $270 instead of $200 declared by the appellants for the two sets of goods. 3. Further the appellants had declared the description of the goods as "Old and Used parts of copier incorporating optical systems" and claimed classification of the goods under Customs Tariff Item 9009 99 00. Revenue was .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... l) challenging the classification adopted by Revenue as well as the value adopted. The Commissioner (Appeal) held that the goods will be classifiable under Tariff Item 9009 99 00. He also held that the Chartered Engineer did not give any basis for the value adopted by him and therefore the order for enhancement of value was not maintainable. However he upheld the confiscation of the goods and redemption fine imposed. Aggrieved by the order of the Commissioner (Appeal) appellants have filed this appeal. 7. The contention of the Appellant is that since the Commissioner (Appeal) had upheld the classification and valuation as declared by the Appellant there was no case for confiscating the goods and imposing any penalty. Further he pleads .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... e argument of the Appellants that once the classification under Tariff Item 9009 99 00 as parts of capital goods, there was no prohibition on its import because the licensing policy against the tariff item indicates that all goods of this Tariff item are freely importable. This argument is applicable equally for the complete photocopiers falling under Tariff Item 9009 12 00 also. But prohibition on import of second hand goods comes from para 2.17 of the Import Policy which restricts import of all second hand goods except second hand capital goods unless there is a licence. There are decisions that photocopiers itself are not capital goods and hence import of second hand photocopiers are prohibited. Parts of photocopiers qualify much less to .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates