9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (8) TMI 430X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... print and copier machines' are incorrect and liable to be set aside - the imposition of redemption fine and penalties on the appellants is not sustainable in law, for the used Digital Multifunction Machines imported by the appellants. Redemption fine in case of imported ‘analog photocopiers’ - Held that: - With regard to this item, no finding has been given in favour of the appellants. Therefore, with regard to 'analogue photocopiers' the concerned appellants are liable to pay redemption fine and penalty. Appeal allowed - decided partly in favor of appellant. - C/2666/2010, C/2307/2010, C/1202-1204/2011, C/1496-1497/2011, C/1531-1533/2011 & C/3148/2011 - 21073-21082/2017 - Dated:- 18-7-2017 - Shri S.S Garg, Judicial Member M ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... hey confirmed that the said Digital Multifunctional Print Copier Machines are with multifunction facilities. The Chartered Engineer has determined the assessable value of the imported goods as ₹ 16,59,812/-. The appellant did not dispute the finding and the value recommended by the Chartered Engineer. The appellant requested the Customs authority to release the goods without adjudication as the appellant was in urgent need of the said goods. Thereafter, the Additional Commissioner without considering the submission of the appellant passed the Order-in-Original imposing exorbitant redemption fine and penalty thereby making it impossible to obtain the release of the goods. 2.2. Thereafter, the appellant approached the Hon'ble H ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... is period, multifunctional digital machines were held by different Benches of the Tribunal to be classifiable under Chapter Sub-heading 847160 of the Customs Tariff. He further submitted that multifunctional machines like the machines involved in the present case are not and cannot be said to be photocopier machines as envisaged under para 2.17 of FTP or photocopying apparatus under the Customs Tariff. He further submitted that identical issue was involved in another case which was decided by this Tribunal in the case of Shivam International Vs. Commissioner of Customs, Cochin [2012 (286) E.L.T. 545 (Tri. -Bang.)] wherein the Tribunal disposed of a batch of the appeals by holding that the impugned orders to the extent of confiscatio ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s. Appeals are accordingly dismissed. The learned counsel also submitted that in view of the judgment of the jurisdictional High Court, these appeals should be allowed and the impugned orders imposing redemption fine and penalty should be set aside. 5. On the other hand, the learned A.R. for the Revenue submitted that there is no difference between the Digital Multifunction Print and Copier Machines/Photocopier Machines and both the items are restricted items and cannot be imported without licence. He further submitted that the Tribunal's Chennai Bench in the case of Commissioner of Customs, Chennai Vs. Jay Dev Industries [2012 (279) E.L.T. 375 (Tri.-Chennai) has taken a contrary view than the view taken by the Tribuna ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 1. C/2666/2010 M/s Office Devices, Amrut Sagari, S. V. Road, Borivli, Mumbai-400092. Rs.32,283/- Rs.7,450/- 2. C/2307/2010 M/s. Atul Automation Pvt. Ltd. Rs.2,019/- Rs.202/- 3. C/1203/2011 M/s Office Devices, Amrut Sagari, S. V. Road, Borivli, Mumbai-400092. Rs.11,103/- Rs.1,057/- 4. C/1204/2011 M/s. Shivam International Rs.6,519/- Rs.1,956/- 5. C/1496/2011 M/s. Ma ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
