Custom, Excise & Service Tax Tribunal
B.E Office Automation Products (P) Ltd vs Commissioner Of Central Excise ... on 28 April, 2014
CUSTOMS, EXCISE & SERVICE TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL SOUTH ZONAL BENCH BANGALORE Final Order . 20657 / 2014 Appeal(s) Involved: C/272/2006-DB [Arising out of order-in-appeal No. 14/2006 (V) CH dated 27/03/2006 passed by the Commissioner of Customs, Bangalore] B.E OFFICE AUTOMATION PRODUCTS (P) LTD 203,HPSICDC INDUSTRIAL AREA BADDI DIST-SOLAN (HP) Appellant(s) Versus Commissioner of Central Excise ,Customs and Service Tax VISAKHAPATNAM-I NULL CENTRAL EXCISE BUILDING PORT AREA VISAKHAPATNAM - 530035 ANDHRA PRADESH Respondent(s)
Appearance:
None for the Appellant Mr. S. Teli, A.R. for the Respondent CORAM:
HON'BLE SHRI B.S.V.MURTHY, TECHNICAL MEMBER HON'BLE SHRI S.K. MOHANTY, JUDICIAL MEMBER Date of Hearing: 28/04/2014 Date of Decision: 28/04/2014 Order Per : B.S.V.MURTHY The appellant imported second hand photocopier, main frames without main electronic components like PCB control panels, covers etc. which are essential for functioning capability of a complete copier machines. Goods were examined by a Chartered Engineer, at the request of Customs Department and consequently proceedings were initiated on the ground of under-valuation of the goods as well as non-availability of license for importation with the appellants.
2. Nobody is present on behalf of the appellants. We find that the appeal relates to the year 2006 and the matter has been coming up from 06.04.2011 onwards on several occasions but nobody was present and on one occasion there was a request for adjournment on 27.08.2012. On last occasion, when the matter was called on 10.02.2014, the matter was heard for considerable amount of time. Learned counsel for the appellants had relied upon the decision in the case of Atul Commodities Pvt. Ltd. Vs CC, Cochin [2009(235)ELT 385(SC)]. After detailed examination and consideration of the said decision cited by the learned counsel, and the facts of the case, the Tribunal had come to a prima facie conclusion that the decision of the Honble Supreme Court would not be applicable to the facts of this case, since there is a clear finding by the Chartered Engineer that the goods imported by the appellants were not second hand photocopiers, the decision of the Honble Supreme Court was rendered in relation to import of second hand photocopiers only. On this, an adjournment was granted to the learned counsel for the appellants so that if there is any other precedent decision, the same can be submitted. The matter was adjourned to 28.04.2014 and it was clearly mentioned that there will be no notice. Today when the matter was called, nobody is present nor is there any request for adjournment by the learned counsel. Since the goods imported are parts of photocopiers and the decision of the Honble Supreme Court relied upon by the learned counsel relates to second hand photocopiers and we find ourselves in agreement with the view taken by the lower authorities that in respect of second hand parts of photocopiers, there is a requirement of license, we consider that the impugned order does not require any interference. We have not discussed in detail since the Honble Supreme Court had considered the issue in great detail with regard to photocopiers and what is imported herein is not photocopiers at all but parts. Accordingly the appeal is rejected.
(Operative portion of the order has been pronounced in open court) S.K. MOHANTY JUDICIAL MEMBER B.S.V.MURTHY TECHNICAL MEMBER Pnr...
2