Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

A perusal of the entire BIS Rules, 1987 also shows that just like BIS Act, 1987, BIS Rules 1987 did not provide for regulating or prohibiting import of goods. Therefore, CRO 2012 has, in clause (3), gone beyond the scope of the Act and the Rules in prescribing a standard for import of goods and in prohibiting import of goods which did not meet the standards. Therefore, it is doubtful, whether in the first place, whether the CRO 2012 is legally sustainable.

19. Be that as it may, even if it is ignored that CRO 2012 was issued beyond the scope of the parent Act and Rules, the Schedule to CRO 2012 covers only "printers and plotters" at Sl.No.7. It did not cover multi-functional devices. The case of the Revenue is that Ministry of Electronics & Information Technology has issued a circular No.1/2019 dt. 02.05.2019 clarifying that multi-functional devices are basically printers with additional features and covered under the category of 'printers and plotters' as notified in the order. Revenue also relies upon another D.O. letter dt. 16.08.2021 issued by the Joint Secretary of the Ministry in the matter. If that argument is accepted, the entry of printers / multi-functional devices / plotters in the Schedule to the CRO 2021 at Sl.No.7 is redundant because if multi-functional devices are also printers, there is no need to include them separately in the CRO 2021. Therefore, the case of the Revenue regarding prohibition of import lies on a shaky ground of circular issued by MeitY which effectively enlarged the scope of entry in the order itself.

        ....          ......         ......         .......       ......

                                    SCHEDULE

     S.No.   Goods or articles           Indian Standard       Title of     Indian
                                                               Standard

      (1)             (2)                       (3)                   (4)
       ...              ....                         ....                   ....
       7.    Printers/Multi-             IS 13252 :            Information
             Function Devices        Part 1 :              Technology
             (MFD) Plotters/             2010                  Equipment
                                                               Safety-General
                                                               Requirements

29. In view of the above, we find that the Ld.Commissioner (Appeals) is correct in allowing redemption of the goods under Section 125 for home consumption. Hon'ble High Court of Telangana & A.P. has released identical goods for home consumption in W.P. No.2728 of 2018 observing as follows:-

Customs Appeal No.75514 of 2022 "As regards the applicability of the Electronics and IT Goods (Requirement for Compulsory Registration) Order (CRO) 2012, the communication dated 06.12.2016 makes it clear that only repaired/refurbished/second hand items, if notified, would require registration. The learned Assistant Solicitor General could not produce before us any notification issued thereunder relating to the MFD (Multi Function Devices) printers and photocopiers, whereby such registration would be a condition precedent prior to their import. In the absence of such a notification, it is not open to the Customs Authorities to blindly apply the directive of the Department of Electronics and Information Technology, Ministry of Communications and Information Technology, under the letter dated 06.12.2016, to the petitioner firm's goods."

30. There is no dispute regarding reduction of penalty under Section 112(a) by the Commissioner (Appeals) which we also find is fair and reasonable.

31. We have already discussed above that goods in question were not waste in the first place but are useful articles with residual life whose value has been enhanced by Customs authorities and therefore the provisions of Hazardous Waste Rules do not apply. In view of the above, we hold as under:-

(i) Electronics & Information Technology Goods (Requirement for Compulsory Registration) Order 2012 has gone beyond the Act and Rules in imposing a restriction from imports. Even these restrictions were confined only to printers and plotters. Multi-Functional Devices were not covered under this order. The letters and circulars of the MeitY cannot take the place of law and therefore the goods were not prohibited for import.