Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

3. The Tribunal, by a common order dismissed all the appeals holding that the Revenue has not made out any case for enhancement of fine and penalty imposed and upheld the order of the Commissioner (Appeals).

4. As against the order of the Tribunal, the Revenue has filed the present Civil Miscellaneous Appeals raising the following substantial questions of law:

"1. Whether, in the facts and circumstances of the case, the Honourable Tribunal is right in holding that digital multifunction photocopiers/printers are not photocopiers and hence not covered under the restrictions imposed under Para 2.17 of the Foreign Trade Policy (FTP) by straight jacketing the term "digital multifunction" based on purely on classification and by ignoring the common trade parlance and the purport and object of the policy formulated by the Govt. of India, that too merely relying on the decision of the CESTAT, Bangalore Bench in such behalf without analyzing it in proper perspective and when the said decision of the CESTAT, Bangalore Bench has been appealed against by the Revenue?