2018 (2) TMI 491 - AT - Customs

Import of restricted item - old/used digital multifunctional Print and Copying Machines - enhancement of value - Held that - the imported goods in question are not restricted item - during the relevant period the impugned goods were not restricted and the adjudicating authority has invoked only Section 111 (d) to hold that goods are liable for confiscation. Hence the imposition of redemption fine and penalty are unsustainable and are required to be set aside - the redemption fine and penalty imposed set aside, without disturbing the enhancement of value - appeal allowed in part.

Summary

Issues:
Import of old/used digital multifunctional Print and Copying Machines without a valid license, enhancement of goods' value, confiscation under Section 111 (d) of the Customs Act, 1962, imposition of redemption fine and penalty.

Analysis:

1. Import of Restricted Goods without License:
The appeal involved the import of old/used digital multifunctional Print and Copying Machines at a declared value of SGD 82,100 without a valid license. The Department contended that the goods were restricted for import and required a license, which the importer failed to produce. The adjudicating authority enhanced the value of the goods to SGD 1,43,170 and confiscated them under Section 111 (d) of the Customs Act, 1962.

2. Legal Interpretation and Precedent:
During the hearing, the appellant's advocate argued that the machines were not restricted items during the relevant period, citing a judgment by the Hon'ble High Court of Madras. The advocate referred to a case where it was held that there was no restriction on the free import of second-hand digital multifunction print and copier machines before 05.06.2012. The advocate agreed to the enhancement in value but challenged the redemption fine and penalty.

3. Adjudication and Decision:
After hearing both parties and examining the records, the Tribunal found merit in the advocate's submissions and the precedent set by the High Court of Madras. The Tribunal concluded that the imported goods were not restricted items during the relevant period. As a result, the imposition of redemption fine and penalty was deemed unsustainable. The adjudicating authority had only invoked Section 111 (d) for confiscation, which was found to be incorrect. Therefore, the Tribunal set aside the redemption fine and penalty while upholding the enhancement of the goods' value.

4. Final Decision and Outcome:
The Tribunal modified the impugned order by setting aside the redemption fine and penalty without affecting the enhancement of the goods' value. The appeal was partly allowed based on the findings that the imported goods were not restricted items during the relevant period, leading to the unsustainable imposition of fines and penalties.

In conclusion, the Tribunal's decision clarified the import regulations regarding the old/used digital multifunctional Print and Copying Machines, emphasizing the importance of compliance with licensing requirements and the legal interpretation of restrictions on imported goods during specific periods.