9911796707
|
Home
Issues:
1. Interpretation of Customs Act, 1962 regarding the classification of imported goods under different Bill of Entry numbers. 2. Determination of whether imported Plastic Moulded Components fall under Open General License (OGL) or specific classification under Appendices. 3. Application of Import & Export Policy Book principles for interpreting entries in Appendices and OGL eligibility. Analysis: 1. The case involved the import of components of Plain Paper Copier under three Bill of Entry numbers. The Deputy Collector of Customs adjudicated the cases, leading to appeals under Section 128 (1) of the Customs Act, 1962. The Collector of Customs (Appeals) Madras remanded two cases for reconsideration and rejected the appeal for the third case, leading to the current appeal related to Bill of Entry No. 10210 dated 6th June 1986. 2. The appellant imported Plastic Moulded Components under Bill of Entry No. 10210 and claimed clearance under OGL, citing Appendix 6 List 8 Part I Serial No. 516. Customs disagreed, classifying the goods under Serial No. 470, Appendix 3 Part A. The Collector of Customs (Appeals) upheld the Deputy Collector's order, prompting the current appeal. 3. The appellant argued that the imported goods were covered by Serial No. 516 of Appendix 6, List 8 Part I, emphasizing that the Rem did not exclude parts of Photo Copier. In contrast, the Respondent contended that Appendix 6, List 8 Part I Serial No. 516 is a general law, while Appendix 3, Part A, Heading 470 specifically covers components of Photo-copying machines. 4. The judge considered both arguments and analyzed the classification under Appendices. The judge noted that the goods could fall under both headings: moulded parts under heading 516 of Appendix 6 List 8 Part I or components of photo-copying machines under Appendix 3, Part A-Serial 470. Referring to the Import & Export Policy Book, the judge applied the principle that specific descriptions preclude OGL eligibility unless explicitly allowed. 5. Ultimately, the judge concluded that the goods were covered by Heading 470 Appendix 3 Part A and not entitled to OGL. The confiscation was deemed correct, but considering the circumstances and lack of intent to mislead Customs, the fine was reduced. The appeal was partly allowed, reducing the fine to Rs. 900, and otherwise rejected based on the classification analysis and interpretation of the Customs Act and relevant policies.
|
