2023 (7) TMI 487 - AT - Customs

Re-classification of imported goods - winches - requirement of compulsory registration with BIS as per IS 15885(Part 2/Section 13) 2012 or not - Confiscation - penalty - HELD THAT - Since, the Tribunal in the first round of litigation has remanded the matter for a limited purpose of ascertaining the applicability of the Act and Rules framed by the BIS, which should only confine ourselves for discussing the issue as to whether the registration and other formalities are required to be complied with by the appellant in respect of the disputed goods imported by him. Since, the case of the appellant is governed under the un-amended Act of 1986 read with the Rules of 1987 and the order issued there under on 07.09.2012, the restriction of registration etc. brought into force later by amended Act w.e.f. 12.10.2017 cannot be imposed in respect of the goods imported by the appellant prior to such enactments took place in the statute. In a similar case, the co-ordinate bench in Chennai in the case of S.P. Associates and others 2021 (9) TMI 770 - CESTAT CHENNAI has held that Compulsory Registration Order (CRO), 2012 was issued under BIS Act, 1986 and BIS Rules, 1987 does not provide any regulation for the imported goods, as it has gone beyond the Act and Rules in imposing a restriction on imports. Thus, it was held that the restrictions imposed therein are not applicable to the goods imported from outside the country. In the said order, the Tribunal has also set aside the order of the lower authority in confiscating the goods and for imposition of penalty on the appellant. There are no merits in the impugned order, insofar as it has upheld the confiscation and imposition of penalty by the original authority - appeal allowed.

Summary

Issues involved:
The issues involved in this case are the classification of goods under CTH 94054090, the requirement of compulsory registration with BIS for imported goods, confiscation of goods, imposition of redemption fine, and penalty on the importer.

Classification of Goods:
The Appellate Tribunal upheld the original order for re-classification of the goods under CTH 94054090, which led to confiscation of goods, imposition of redemption fine, and penalty on the importer. This decision was based on the function of the 'winches' as an LED driver with integrated control gear, necessitating compulsory registration with BIS as per IS:15885(Part 2/Section 13): 2012.

Compulsory Registration with BIS:
The Tribunal deliberated on the applicability of the Electronics and Information Technology Goods (Requirements for Compulsory Registration) Order, 2012 to the imported goods. The appellant argued that the goods did not require certification by BIS under the Bureau of Indian Standards Act, 1986. The appellant contended that the provisions of the Customs Act, 1962 and Section 112 for confiscation and penalty should not apply. The Tribunal agreed with the appellant, citing precedents where it was held that the restrictions under the Compulsory Registration Order, 2012 are not applicable to goods imported from outside the country. Therefore, the Tribunal set aside the confiscation and penalty imposed on the importer.

Judicial Interpretation:
The Tribunal analyzed the Bureau of Indian Standards Act, 1986 and the Rules framed thereunder in the context of importation of goods. The appellant argued that the Act and Rules should not apply to goods imported into India, especially considering the definitions of 'article' and 'person' in the Acts. The Tribunal concurred with the appellant's stance, emphasizing that the restrictions introduced post the importation of goods should not be retroactively enforced. The Tribunal referenced a similar case in Chennai where the restrictions under the Compulsory Registration Order, 2012 were deemed inapplicable to imported goods. Consequently, the Tribunal allowed the appeal in favor of the appellant, overturning the impugned order that upheld confiscation and penalty.