Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

4. Learned Counsel was emphatic that customs authorities could not be correct in their determination as the product was 'capable of connecting to 'automatic data processing (ADP)' machine through network cable, viz., Gigabit Ethernet', for which he drew attention to the brochure that, though placed before the first appellate authority, did not appear to have made any impression. Analyzing structuring below, and 'Printing machinery used for printing by means of plates, cylinders and other printing components of heading 8442; other printers, copying machines and facsimile machines, whether or not combined; parts and accessories thereof' as description in heading 8443 in First Schedule to Customs Tariff Act, 1975, he disaggregated these to be distinguishable by use of particular technology or process, other reproduction equipment and parts and C/86479/2014 accessories of which the second, according to him, was amenable to distinguishment as multi-functional printers capable of connecting to 'automatic data processing (ADP)' machine, printers capable of connecting to 'automatic data processing (ADP)' machine or network and printers not capable of connecting to 'automatic data processing (ADP)' machine or network. Thus, the primary submission is anchored in the proposition that the latter tariff line is a 'vestigial relic on ventilator support' and that, to bring that tariff back to life, excepting printers, even if capable of connecting to 'automatic data processing (ADP)' machine or network, merely from being enabled to work independently is perverse feel for legislative intent. Essentially, he contends that tax policy, especially in relation to 'inkjet printers', should have had clarity enough and that frailty should not be brought to bear on the appellant going on about their normal business.