2005 (7) TMI 238 - AT - Customs

Summary

Issues involved: Import of used photocopier machines, whether they are considered capital goods and require a license under the Exim policy.

Analysis:
1. The appeals involved the issue of whether the import of used photocopier machines should be treated as capital goods and if a license is required for their import. The lower authorities had denied the benefit of Open General License (OGL) and confiscated the goods, granting redemption on fine and penalty based on the requirement of a license for import.

2. The matter was referred to a Larger Bench in a previous case, where it was held that second-hand photocopier machines should be treated as capital goods and do not require a license for import under OGL. Following this decision, the appeals in question were allowed by the Larger Bench and subsequently by the current Bench in another related case.

3. The learned Counsel did not challenge the valuation but argued that the appeals should be allowed on the grounds that the import does not require a license, leading to the setting aside of the confiscation, fine, and penalty.

4. The Senior Departmental Representative (SDR) acknowledged that the issue was covered by the previous judgments but expressed the departmental view regardless.

5. After careful consideration, the Bench agreed with the Counsel's submissions, noting that the issue in all four appeals pertained to the import of second-hand photocopier machines. The authorities had confiscated the goods based on the requirement of a license under the Exim policy, but the appellants' argument that the machines were capital goods and did not require a license was accepted by the Larger Bench and subsequently by the current Bench. Therefore, the confiscation orders and penalties were set aside in all four appeals, allowing them accordingly with any consequential relief.

This comprehensive analysis of the judgment highlights the key issues, arguments presented, legal interpretations, and the final decision reached by the Appellate Tribunal CESTAT, Bangalore.