9911796707
|
Home
Issues: Alleged import of old machines under false pretenses, violation of OGL conditions, confiscation of imported machines, imposition of penalty.
In the present case, the Department received information regarding the alleged import of very old second-hand machines by affixing new number plates and manipulating manufacturing details to circumvent the conditions of the Open General Licence (OGL). The Department discovered discrepancies in the import documents of the appellants, leading to suspicions that the machines were not in compliance with the OGL conditions. Subsequent investigations revealed that the machines supplied by the foreign supplier were actually manufactured much earlier than claimed, rendering them ineligible for clearance under OGL. As per Paragraph 64(2) of the Import Policy, the machines were required to be less than 7 years old and have a residuary life of not less than 5 years, conditions which were not met in this case. Consequently, a show cause notice was issued proposing confiscation and penalty. The adjudicating authority upheld the charges, confiscated the machines under the Customs Act, and imposed a fine and penalty on the appellants. The appeal challenged these decisions. Upon hearing the arguments, the appellate tribunal analyzed the evidence, particularly a report from the Italian Chamber of Commerce and Industry, which confirmed that one machine was manufactured in 1969, not in 1983 as claimed. Due to insufficient evidence regarding the manufacturing year of the other machines, the tribunal set aside the confiscation of nine machines but upheld it for the one machine with concrete evidence of age discrepancy. The appellants' argument that subsequent Import Policies had relaxed the age restrictions was rejected, as the policy in force during the import period mandated compliance with the age criteria specified under the OGL. Regarding the penalty, the tribunal noted that the burden of proof regarding the appellants' knowledge or belief of the machines' ineligibility for import had not been met by the Department, leading to the penalty being set aside. Ultimately, the tribunal upheld the confiscation of the machine with clear evidence of age manipulation, reduced the redemption fine, and completely annulled the penalty, disposing of the appeal accordingly.
|
