9911796707
Advanced Search 
TMI Blog2016 (4) TMI 138X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... motors etc. The adjudicating authority has rejected the declared value of US$54550 and enhanced the value to Rs. US$ 71,500 under Rule 8 of CVR and also confiscated the goods under Section 111 (d) of Customs Act for contravention of FTP license and mis-declaration of the goods but permitted the appellants to redeem the same on payment of a fine of Rs. 4,90,000/- and imposed a penalty of Rs. 1,64,000/- under Section 112 (a) of the Customs Act. 2. The Ld. Counsel Shri N. Viswanathan, Advocate, appearing on behalf of the appellant placed the decision of the Tribunal in the case of M/s. Office Tec Industries Vs. CC (Port-Export), Chennai reported in 2015 (320) E.L.T. 150 (Tri. - Chennai), wherein the Tribunal observed that the import of second ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ribunal set aside the impugned orders in respect of licensing part and held as under:- "In all the above cases, the common issue involved is the free importability of old and used photocopiers imported by the appellants herein (although the value declared by the importers has been rejected and value enhanced by the Customs authorities, that is not the subject matter of challenge in any of these appeals). The goods have been confiscated in terms of Section 111(d) of the Customs Act, 1962 read with Section 3(3) of the Foreign Trade (Development & Regulation) Act for import of goods without specific licence, and an option to redeem them on payment of fine has been extended. Penalty has also been imposed upon the importers under Section 112 of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... a licence. They came in the restricted category. However, in the Handbook (2002-07) it was inter alia provided that old and used capital goods which were not more than 10 years old could be imported freely. Those goods, therefore, were treated as "new" goods. This resulted in confusion. Therefore, DGFT stepped in to clarify that second-hand photocopying machines, irrespective of the period of use, shall fall in the restricted category (see Policy Circular No. 19/03). Para 1 of Policy Circular No. 20/05 recites that photocopying machines are not to be imported without a licence even if they are less than 10 years old and even if the photocopying machines are imported for service providers. Vide para 3, the Policy Circular No. 20/05 clarifies ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... has held that the use of these machines for rendering services makes them capital goods. In fact, this finding on the "user" is not challenged by the Department. Therefore, import of old and used photocopying machines stands covered by the concept of "second-hand capital goods" in para 2.17 (particularly in the light of the last statement in the said para, which we have underlined hereinabove. 21. One more aspect needs to be mentioned. Para 2.33 expressly states that import of old and used computers/second-hand computers are restricted. Para 2.33 of the Handbook do not restrict photocopying machines. Import of photocopying machines are expressly restricted only by Notification No. 31, dated 19-10-2005. This itself indicates that categori ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
