TMI Blog2003 (6) TMI 160X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of Entry No. 156609, dated 30-12-2002 by appellants Ma Sherawali Impex, all other consignments comprised of functional assemblies, i.e. old and used components of photocopiers (also known as main frame). The components under the above noted bill of entry No. 156609 imported by Ma Sherawali Impex comprised only of top panel covers, right covers, control panels, etc. all old and used components of photocopiers along with some new spares. The appellants have furnished the details of the goods imported in each consignment in the Annexures A and B filed in the respective paper books. Bills of entry were filed by the respective importers-appellants and the goods were examined by the proper officer in the presence of the Assistant Commissioner/Deputy Commissioner and the Govt. approved Chartered Engineer who issued certificates in regard to condition of the goods and their value. The proper officer thereafter passed an order directing examination of the whole goods i.e. 100% in the presence of the Customs Officers and the certificate issued by the Chartered Engineer was duly accepted by the Examining officer. Proceedings were thereafter initiated by the Customs authorities on the allega ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ort of the goods by the Customs authorities which has been filed as Annexure C in the Appeal papers of Appeal No CDM 48/2003 (in the case of Sherawali Impex) herein the following remarks have been made by the authorities : (a) The goods have been found to be old and used. (b) Year of manufacture of machines have not been found. (c) In the absence of catalogue/price list it is not possible to determine the value of the goods at this end. However, Chartered Engineers Certificate signed by us may please be seen. Goods detained till further orders from Group : He has also invited our attention to Annexure D in the paper book of (Appeal No. CDM 48/2003) evidencing payment of an amount of Rs. 1,73,322/- on account of customs duty, fine and penalty. He has also invited our attention to the order-in-original dated 14-1-2003 in the case of Appeal No. CDM-48/2003 wherein the original authority had clearly mentioned that the goods imported are old and used component of Photocopier and the same should be covered by Para 2.17 of the EX1M POLICY. Handbook of Procedures (Vol. 1) and by holding so, the original authority had confiscated the goods with option to redeem ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... evenue cannot take the full value of the full video camera and since there was no misdeclaration as the part of sub-assembly were fully disclosed in the respective bills of entry the goods cannot be confiscated under Section 111(m) of the Customs Act, 1962. (d)Sony India Ltd v. CC, New Delhi reported in 2002 (143) E.L.T. 411 (Tri. - LB). In this case components of CTV were brought un-assembled for packing, handling and transporting. - It was noted by the Larger Bench that manufacture of colour TV involves complex process. In the circumstances it was held that components were not to be treated as complete CTV either before or after amendment of Rule 2(a) of Interpretative Rules. In holding so the Larger Bench has relied upon a large number of judgments of the Hon'ble Supreme Court and of the Tribunal. Similar arguments have been advanced by the learned Counsels in respect of the other appeals also and submitted that the Order-in-Appeal is factually wrong and he prayed for setting aside the same. 4.Shri Biswajeet Mukherjee learned Advocate appearing for the Revenue on the other hand submitted that the appellants have imported 10 consignments of photocopier and declared them as ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the original authority has noted that the importers have grossly undervalued the goods and he has enhanced the value accordingly though without any discussion. Since the appellants have contravened the provisions of the EXIM policy in importing the goods without a licence, the original authority had ordered confiscation of the goods with option to redeem the same on payment of fine, besides imposition of penalty. We observe that the gravamen of the Department is that the importers have imported "almost complete photocopiers" under the guise of components Examining this question, we observe that in all these cases, as noted above, the Chartered Engineers have certified that what was imported was components of photocopiers and not complete photocopiers. There is certainly difference between what is known as "almost complete photocopiers" and complete photocopiers. It is common knowledge that when photocopier is almost complete" it implies that certain parts are required for them to become complete and unless the photocopiers are complete in all respects, it cannot be said that it is fully functional. We further observe that the Commissioner (Appeals) in the impugned order has referre ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... and they are classifiable under sub-heading 9009.99 and not under 9009.12 as complete photocopier. In arriving at this conclusion we find support from the judgment of the Larger Bench in the case of Sony India Ltd. v. CC, ICD, New Delhi reported in 2002 (143) E.L.T. 411 (Tri. - LB) wherein it was held that components of Colour TV cannot be treated as complete CTV. It was also held therein that components of colour TV brought under different consignments over period of time cannot be clubbed as to consider them complete TV sets. We also take note of the judgment rendered by the South Zonal Bench in the case of Award Electronics v. CC, Chennai reported in 2003 (153) E.L.T. 210 (T) = 2003 (85) ECC 737 by relying upon the Larger Bench decision in the case of Sony India Ltd. v. CC, ICD, New Delhi (supra) wherein it was held that the Revenue cannot take full value of the cameras, for the parts of cameras imported. 6.In view of our discussion and findings, we are of the considered opinion that there is no material to sustain the order impugned and we set aside the same and allow the appeals with consequential relief if any. Before parting with this case, we would like to however, observ ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
