9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (9) TMI 904X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... imilar goods is also to be examined - the original assessing authority directed to obtain an expert opinion and to examine such opinion along with the claim of the appellant regarding permission granted to similarly placed imports for clearance of identical goods by Chennai Customs on fine and penalty - appeal allowed by way of remand. - C/41616/2017 - Final Order No. 41997/2017 - Dated:- 6-9-2017 - Ms. Sulekha Beevi C.S., Member ( Judicial ) And Shri B. Ravichandran, Member ( Technical ) Shri Dr. S. Krishnanandh, Advocate, for the Appellant Shri B. Balamurugan, AC (AR) for the Respondent ORDER Per : B. Ravichandran The appeal is against the order dated 24.05.2017 of the Commissioner of Customs (Appeals-II), Chennai ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... l use and the Ld. Counsel pleaded that similar such imports have been regularly allowed though with redemption fine and some penalty. The authorities now changed the practice in the appellant s case and confiscated the goods absolutely. He states that even if there is a violation, imported goods were allowed for clearance with an option to redeem on nominal fine and penalty considering the nature and use of the item and status of the importer as charitable organisation. 3. The Ld. AR opposed the appeal. He submitted that the entry B1110 states that used Critical Care Medical Equipment for reuse are prohibited for import. Admittedly, the appellant is not having any authorization or license for import of used equipment. The lower authoriti ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . While they claim on uniform practice can be considered, we note that the facts of the present case are to be addressed first. Admittedly, used Critical Care Medical Equipment for reuse are put under prohibited category of import. This dispute boils down to the fact that whether the dialysis machine imported by the appellant will fall under life saving equipment as defined under para-3 (9) of the Notification dated 04.04.2016 of the Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change. The impugned order clearly records no expert opinion was taken in the present case. However it proceeds to hold that the equipment is the life saving equipment. It would be advisable and proper to obtain expert opinion instead of presuming or inferring the sco ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
