9911796707
Advanced Search 
TMI Blog2008 (6) TMI 36X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ther the CESTAT is legally right in holding that the second-hand used photocopiers, copying assembly, which were involved in the import in question are required to be treated as 'Capital Goods' and therefore, import of the same does not required a 'License' under the Exim Policy?" 2. The learned Counsel for the appellants contends in support of the substantial questions of law placing reliance upon the Exim Policy Circular dated 19-10-2005 vide Annexure-G issued by the Director General of Foreign Trade in exercise of his power under Section 5 of the Foreign Trade (Development and Regulation) Act, 1992 (No. 22 of 1992) read with paragraph 1.3 of the Foreign Trade Policy 2004-2009 as amended from time to time, the Central Government has made ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed by the Director General of Foreign Trade in exercise of his power under Sec. 5 of said Act at Annexures D,E,F & G which were the Exim Policy Circulars issued by the said authority to find out the correctness of the findings and reasons recorded by the Tribunal in the impugned order with a view to find out whether the question of law framed in this case would certainly arise or not. 5. For the purpose of recording our reasons on the above substantial question of law after considering the rival legal submissions of the learned Counsel for the parties, it is necessary to extract the relevant portion of the Exim Policy Circular dated 11-11-2003 at para-1 which reads thus : "In continuation of Policy Circular No. 16 dated 29-9-2003 whereby ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 1962. 7. In our considered view, the order passed by the Tribunal in setting aside the impugned order in the appeal are based on facts and Exim Policy which were in force at the relevant point of time, policy circulars are rightly classified as imported goods, second-hand goods which would be used for rendering service to their customers or in offices and the licence need not be obtained as the same are capital goods. 8. The reliance placed upon the Division Bench decision of the Kerala High Court in Commissioner of Customs, Cochin v. Atul Commidities Pvt. Ltd. has overruled the Northern Larger Bench, Delhi decision by not accepting Delhi High Court in the case of Prashant Glass Works Pvt. Ltd. v. Collector of Customs-1995 (77) E.L.T. 844 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
