2018 (7) TMI 38 - HC - Customs

Import of restricted item - used and old photocopiers - import of impugned without specific License - Confiscation - redemption fine - Held that - The issue is squarely covered by a decision of this Court in Commissioner of Customs Vs. M/s.City Office Equipment 2013 (4) TMI 655 - MADRAS HIGH COURT , where it was held that when paragraph 2.17 of the Foreign Trade Policy specifically refers the circumstances or the conditions under which the import policy regime is laid, in the absence of any other restriction specified anywhere either in the policy or in the Handbook of Procedures (Vol. I) with reference to any of those specified restricted category of second hand capital goods--photocopier machines and digital multifunction printing and copying machines as falling in line with personal computers and laptops, the mere instance of photocopier and digital multifunction printing and copying machines being restricted category of second hand capital goods, cannot bring them under any assumed restriction on par with personal computers/laptops for the purpose of imports into this country. Appeal dismissed - decided against Revenue.

Summary

Issues:
Customs authorities' appeal against a single Judge's order regarding the import of used photocopiers without a license under para 2.17 of the Exim Policy.

Analysis:
The petitioner imported used photocopiers without the required license, leading to customs authorities withholding clearance. The single Judge directed release upon payment of enhanced duty and a penalty. The appeal challenges this order, emphasizing the lack of the necessary license for goods import under para 2.17 of the Foreign Trade Policy.

The appeal referenced a previous judgment by the High Court, highlighting the interpretation of import procedures for second-hand capital goods under clause 2.33 of the Handbook of Procedures. The judgment clarified that while certain restricted items require specific conditions for import, others, including photocopier machines, can be freely imported under clause 2.33 without a distinction between refurbished and non-refurbished goods.

Citing the previous ruling, the Court dismissed the appeal, affirming that the import policy regime, as outlined in para 2.17, does not impose additional restrictions beyond those specified in clause 2.33 of the Handbook of Procedures. The judgment emphasized that compliance with conditions is alternative, not cumulative, rejecting the revenue's argument for imposing further restrictions on photocopier imports.

The Court's decision, based on the interpretation of relevant policies and procedures, upholds the single Judge's order for release upon payment of enhanced duty and penalty. The appeal was dismissed, and no costs were awarded, concluding the matter with the closure of the connected miscellaneous petition.