TMI Blog2023 (7) TMI 487X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... under the un-amended Act of 1986 read with the Rules of 1987 and the order issued there under on 07.09.2012, the restriction of registration etc. brought into force later by amended Act w.e.f. 12.10.2017 cannot be imposed in respect of the goods imported by the appellant prior to such enactments took place in the statute. In a similar case, the co-ordinate bench in Chennai in the case of S.P. Associates and others [ 2021 (9) TMI 770 - CESTAT CHENNAI ] has held that Compulsory Registration Order (CRO), 2012 was issued under BIS Act, 1986 and BIS Rules, 1987 does not provide any regulation for the imported goods, as it has gone beyond the Act and Rules in imposing a restriction on imports. Thus, it was held that the restrictions imposed t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... demption fine for re-export purpose and penalty on the appellant-importer. 2. This is the second round of litigation before the Tribunal. In the first round, the Tribunal vide Final Order No. A/85356/2021 dated 12.02.2021 has remanded the matter back to the original authority for determination of Indian Standard applicable to subject imported goods as per column no. (3) of table given as the schedule to the Electronics and Information Technology Goods (Requirements for Compulsory Registration) Order, 2012. Further, the Tribunal also directed the original authority for consideration of the issue of applicability of the order of 2012 to the impugned goods and for determination of the issue regarding confiscation of the subject goods and al ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... posed such as registration and compliance of the procedures, etc. have been framed by the Central Government, the same should strictly be adhered to by the importers and since the appellant did not comply with such requirements, the goods were liable for confiscation and the appellant is also exposed to the penal consequences provided under the statue. 5. Heard both sides and examined the case records. 6. The issue involved in this appeal for consideration by the Tribunal is whether the Order dated 07.09.2012 supra is applicable for compliance of the requirements contained therein in respect of the impugned goods imported by the appellant herein. 7. The Learned Advocate advanced his arguments in claiming that the Bureau of Indian S ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ther the registration and other formalities are required to be complied with by the appellant in respect of the disputed goods imported by him. Since, the case of the appellant is governed under the un-amended Act of 1986 read with the Rules of 1987 and the order issued there under on 07.09.2012, the restriction of registration etc. brought into force later by amended Act w.e.f. 12.10.2017 cannot be imposed in respect of the goods imported by the appellant prior to such enactments took place in the statute. We find that in a similar case, the co-ordinate bench in Chennai in the case of S.P. Associates and others supra has held that Compulsory Registration Order (CRO), 2012 was issued under BIS Act, 1986 and BIS Rules, 1987 does not provide ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
