1994 (5) TMI 38 - CGOVT - Customs

Summary

Issues:
1. Interpretation of family unit for concessional rate of duty under Notification No. 137/90.
2. Treatment of used FAX machine and audio processors as bona fide articles of baggage.
3. Eligibility for Rule 4 allowance under TR Rules for professional equipment.
4. Application of Rule 4 to individual family members despite baggage coming in the name of the head of the family.

Analysis:
The judgment addressed the issue of defining a 'family' unit for concessional duty rates under Notification No. 137/90. The applicant argued that the goods belonged to three separate families based on separate income tax returns, but the government found that they shared a common establishment and were entitled to only one unit of concessional rate of duty. The plea for releasing more than one specified item was rejected as all family members were considered one 'family' for the purpose of the notification.

Regarding the clearance of used FAX machine and audio processors, the judgment ruled that the FAX machine should be treated as a bona fide article of baggage due to the family's computer establishment activities. The confiscation of the FAX machine was set aside, and all audio processors were ordered to be released duty-free as they were not specified in Notification No. 137/90.

The judgment also discussed the eligibility for Rule 4 allowance under TR Rules for professional equipment. While the appellate authority did not address this plea, the original authority denied it based on the passenger not meeting the conditions for highly qualified persons. However, the judgment clarified that the concept of 'family' only applies to Notification 137/90, not Rule 4. It was emphasized that individual family members meeting the qualifications of a highly qualified person can still benefit from Rule 4, even if the baggage was in the name of the head of the family.

In conclusion, the judgment ordered the FAX machine and audio processors to be treated as bona fide articles of baggage for duty-free clearance. Additionally, Rule 4 allowances were extended for one computer of the applicant's choice for the use of his daughter-in-law. The Revision Application was disposed of accordingly.