Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

iii) Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case, the CESTAT is right in overlooking the CRO, 2012, which covers Multifunctional and Printers/ Devices (MFDs) along with printers and plotters?"

2. According to the appellant, the respondent herein submitted Bill of Entry No.2706447 dated 04.04.2019 for clearance of imported consignments viz., 126 units of used Digital Multifunctional and Printers/Devices (MFDs) of various makes and models with standard accessories and attachments by classifying them under Customs Tariff Heading 84433100. Upon examination of the goods on first check appraisal in the presence of a Chartered Accountant and on perusal of the documents and the Chartered Engineer's verification report, the officials of the appellant department came to the conclusion that the goods are liable for confiscation in terms of Section 111 (d), 111 (m) and 111 (o) of the Customs Act, 1962 for contravening the provisions of Hazardous and other Waster (Management & Trans Boundary Movement) Rules, 2016, E-waste (Management) Rules, 2016 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis and the Bureau of Indian Standards Act, 1986 read with Electronics and IT Goods (Requirement of Compulsory Registration) Order, 2012 as well as the provisions of Foreign Trade Policy 2015-20 read with Foreign Trade (Development and Regulation) Act, 1992 read with Section 11 of the Customs Act, 1962 for the mis-declaration of value and quantity of goods imported. A show cause notice dated 20.06.2019 was issued by the appellant proposing to confiscate the goods under Section 111 (d) and 111 (m) of the Customs Act, 1962 and proposing imposition of penalty under Section 112 (a) and 117 of the Customs Act, 1962. In the meantime, the respondent filed WP No. 12846 of 2019 seeking a direction to the appellant to assess and clear the goods upon payment of applicable duties on value, as determined by the Chartered Engineer. By order dated 25.06.2019, the said writ petition came to be allowed by directing the department to conduct adjudication of consignment in terms of the applicable statutory provisions. Pursuant to such order, an order was passed determining the value of the goods as Rs.23,10,504/- in terms of Rule 9 of CVR 2007 and further ordered confiscation of 136 units of goods and imposed penalty of Rs.2,30,000/- under Section 112 (a) and redemption fine of Rs.3,50,000/- under Section 125 of the Customs Act together with penalty of Rs.25,000/- under Section 117 of The Customs Act. Aggrieved by the said order, an appeal was filed and it was partly allowed on 30.12.2020 modifying https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis the order by reducing the redemption fine and penalty. As against the said order dated 30.12.2020, the appellant filed an appeal before the Tribunal and it was dismissed on 27.08.2021. Challenging the same, the present appeal is filed by the appellant.