Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

APPERANCE :

Shri Shouvendu Banerjee, Advocate & Shri S.C.Ratho,Consultant of the Appellant Shri Fiaz Ahmed, Authorized Representative for the Respondent CORAM:
HON'BLE MR.ASHOK JINDAL, MEMBER (JUDICIAL) HON'BLE MR.K.ANPAZHAKAN, MEMBER (TECHNICAL) FINAL ORDER NO...76062/2023 DATE OF HEARING : 11 .07.2023 DATE OF DECISION : 11 .07.2023 Per Ashok Jindal :
The appellant is in appeal against the impugned order wherein it has been held that the import of Digital Multifunction Printers are restricted items and license is required for imports made on 28.02.2013 onwards.

2. The facts of the case are that the appellant imported old and used Digital Multifunction Printers and filed bill of entry on 28.02.2013. The goods were examined in the presence of Customs Officials, Chartered Engineer and representative of the appellant and found to be old and used having residual life of more than six years and the said machines were found to be minor reconditioning and values were assessed on Customs Appeal No.70671/2013 the enhanced value as compared to declared value. The said value was arrived by Chartered Engineer after inspection and production of market value recommendations based on several aspects like useful life of machines/Make & Model/technology/country of origin/physical condition/comparison with similar goods imported in past/internet information/reconditioning etc.. It was held that the said consignment being second hand was restricted item in terms of Para 2.17 of Foreign Trade Policy, 2009 - 2014 and Para 2.33 & 2.33A of HBP and could be imported against valid license. Therefore, the goods in question are restricted items and import of the same was disallowed and it was held that being restricted items and has not been produced any license, the goods are liable to hold confiscation. Consequently, redemption fine and penalty were imposed on enhanced value on the appellant. Against the said order, the appellant is before us.