Feedback   New User   Login      
Tax Management India. Com TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Acts / Rules Notifications Circulars Tariff/ ITC HSN Forms Case Laws Manuals Short Notes Articles SMS News Highlights
        Home        
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

M/s Office Devices, M/s. Atul Automation Pvt. Ltd., M/s. Copier Marketing Corporation, M/s. Shivam International And M/s. Maa Tara Enterprises Versus CC, Cochin

2017 (8) TMI 430 - CESTAT BANGALORE

Classification of imported goods - old & used Digital Multifunctional Print & Copier Machines with accessories and attachments - release of goods on payment of redemption fine and penalty - Held that: - similar issue decided in the case of Shivam International Vs. Commissioner of Customs, Cochin [2013 (3) TMI 408 - CESTAT BANGALORE] wherein the Tribunal disposed of a batch of the appeals by holding that the impugned orders to the extent of confiscation and consequent penalties challenged in resp .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

d appellants are liable to pay redemption fine and penalty. - Appeal allowed - decided partly in favor of appellant. - C/2666/2010, C/2307/2010, C/1202-1204/2011, C/1496-1497/2011, C/1531-1533/2011 & C/3148/2011 - 21073-21082/2017 - Dated:- 18-7-2017 - Shri S.S Garg, Judicial Member Mr. P.A. Augustian, Advocate - For the Appellants Mr. N. Jagadish, A.R. - For the Respondent ORDER The present ten (10) appeals have been filed by different appellants against the impugned Order-in-Appeals passed .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ories and attachments) and filed a Bill of Entry No.261304 dated 11/01/2010 through its clearing agent. The total declared value of the said goods was ₹ 16,59,812/-. The 100 Digital Multifunctional Machines imported by the appellants have multifunction facilities, capable of performing two or more functions i.e. Scan Print, Fax, E-mail, etc. in standalone mode having devices such as HDD, RAM etc. These 100 multifunction machines are classifiable under CTH 84433100 and Basic Customs Duty on .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

llant did not dispute the finding and the value recommended by the Chartered Engineer. The appellant requested the Customs authority to release the goods without adjudication as the appellant was in urgent need of the said goods. Thereafter, the Additional Commissioner without considering the submission of the appellant passed the Order-in-Original imposing exorbitant redemption fine and penalty thereby making it impossible to obtain the release of the goods. 2.2. Thereafter, the appellant appro .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

held the Order-in-Original with modification in redemption fine and penalties. Hence the present appeal before this Tribunal. 3. Heard both the parties and perused the records. 4. The learned counsel for the appellants submitted that the impugned orders passed by the Commissioner (Appeals) is patently erroneous, contrary to law and is untenable and unsustainable in view of the judgments delivered by various higher judicial fora. He further submitted that the only function of photocopying machine .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

iff and during this period, multifunctional digital machines were held by different Benches of the Tribunal to be classifiable under Chapter Sub-heading 847160 of the Customs Tariff. He further submitted that multifunctional machines like the machines involved in the present case are not and cannot be said to be "photocopier machines" as envisaged under para 2.17 of FTP or "photocopying apparatus" under the Customs Tariff. He further submitted that identical issue was involve .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

Tribunal in the case of Shivam International (supra) before the Hon'ble High Court of Kerala and the Hon'ble High Court has dismissed the Revenue's appeal vide order dated 02/06/2016 in Customs Appeal No.7 of 2011, wherein the Hon'ble High Court has observed in Paragraph 2 as under : "2. We heard the learned Standing Counsel for the appellant and the learned Senior Counsel and the other counsel, who appeared for the respondents. We find that the view taken by the Tribunal in .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

e any SLP before the Apex Court. This means that the Government of India itself have accepted the view taken by the Madras High Court, upholding the view taken by the Tribunal in the impugned orders herein. In such circumstances, we do not find any reason to entertain these appeals. Appeals are accordingly dismissed. The learned counsel also submitted that in view of the judgment of the jurisdictional High Court, these appeals should be allowed and the impugned orders imposing redemption fine an .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

y the Tribunal's Bangalore Bench in the case of Shivam International (supra). Similarly, the Chennai Bench of the Tribunal in the case of M/s. Unitech Enterprises Vs. Commissioner of Customs, Chennai [2012-TIOL-976-CESTAT-MAD] also distinguished the decision in case of Shivam International (supra). 6. I have carefully considered the submissions made by both the sides and have gone through the case laws cited by both the parties. Since the decision of the Tribunal in the case of Shivam Intern .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 

Discussion Forum
what is new what is new
 


Share:            

|| Home || About us || Feedback || Contact us || Disclaimer || Terms of Use || Privacy Policy || TMI Database || Members ||

© Taxmanagementindia.com [A unit of MS Knowledge Processing Pvt. Ltd.] All rights reserved.

Go to Mobile Version