2026-VIL-1096-CESTAT-KOL-CU
  1. Home
  2. 2026-VIL-1096-CESTAT-KOL-CU

CUSTOMS CESTAT Cases

Customs - Applicability of Foreign Trade Policy 2023 - Para 2.31(I)(b) - Restriction on Import of Second-hand Electronics and IT Goods – Appellant imported consignments of old and used multi-function copying printer machines through regular channels without obtaining authorization from the DGFT. The goods were declared in Bills of Entry and subjected to first-check examination. The consignments comprised used MFDs of various makes and models - Whether imported old and used multi-function copying machines fall within the restricted category under Para 2.31(I)(b) of the Foreign Trade Policy, 2023 and require authorization from the DGFT for lawful import – HELD - The old and used multi-function copying machines, being electronic and IT goods, fall squarely within the restricted category under Para 2.31(I)(b) of the Foreign Trade Policy, 2023. The statutory provision expressly covers second-hand capital goods other than re-manufactured capital goods which are covered under electronics and IT goods and categorizes them as restricted. Importation thereof is permissible only upon obtaining requisite authorization from the Director General of Foreign Trade. Where the legislature has prescribed a clear classification without ambiguity, effect must be given to the statutory language in its ordinary and natural sense. The provision does not create a residuary category that would render the restricted items freely importable. In the absence of the requisite authorization, the goods become liable to confiscation under Section 111(d) of the Customs Act, 1962 - The reliance on provisional release orders granted by higher Courts in similar matters is rejected as such orders expressly leave it open to the Customs authorities to proceed with adjudication in accordance with law. The issue being pending before the Supreme Court, the established course of law deserves to be followed - The goods are rightly held liable to confiscation under Section 111(d) of the Customs Act, 1962. However, considering the absence of any clandestine importation or mis-declaration regarding the description of goods, the redemption fine is reduced - The issue stands answered accordingly - Exemption as Highly Specialised Equipment under Electronics and Information Technology Goods (Requirements of Compulsory Registration) Order, 2021 - Appellant claimed exemption for the imported machines under Para 8 of the Compulsory Registration Order, 2021, contending that the equipment satisfies two of the four specified criteria for highly specialised equipment, namely, single phase power supply with current rating exceeding 16 Ampere and weight exceeding 80 kilograms. The adjudicating authority rejected this claim, interpreting the exemption to apply only to specialized equipment like high-end servers for nuclear reactors, space programmes and data centres - Whether multi-function copying machines qualify as highly specialised equipment entitled to exemption from compulsory BIS registration under Para 8 of the Compulsory Registration Order, 2021 when they satisfy the objective criteria prescribed therein - HELD – The Para 8 of the Compulsory Registration Order, 2021 prescribes four objective and quantifiable criteria for determining highly specialised equipment exemption, requiring fulfillment of any one criterion. The statutory provision employs plain and unambiguous language and does not restrict the benefit to any particular sector, industry or specialized domain. Where the language employed by the legislature is plain and unambiguous, effect must be given to the same in its ordinary sense, and no words can be added thereunder the guise of interpretation. The adjudicating authority has impermissibly traveled beyond the statutory text to import extraneous limitations unsupported by the legislation. The respondent's earlier conduct treating similar goods as highly specialised equipment for other importers and releasing machines up to 100 units per model demonstrates inconsistency and discrimination. The respondent's own prior orders in respect of similar goods imported by the same appellant had treated those goods as highly specialised equipment without insisting on BIS registration. The decision must rest upon consistent appreciation of evidence and cannot be founded upon contradictory assumptions. The equipment in question demonstrably satisfies at least two of the four prescribed criteria - The findings rejecting the claim of exemption as highly specialised equipment are unsustainable and set aside. The imported goods cannot be treated as liable to confiscation on account of alleged non-compliance with the Compulsory Registration Order, 2021 - Equipment Type Approval from Wireless Planning and Coordination Wing - Reliance on Hearsay Evidence - Requirement of Equipment Type Approval for wireless communication devices and evidentiary standards - Whether confiscation of imported multi-function devices can be sustained on the ground of non-compliance with Equipment Type Approval requirements from the Wireless Planning and Coordination Wing when the allegation rests solely on hearsay evidence derived from brochures without independent verification or opportunity for the importer to rebut – HELD - The findings regarding Equipment Type Approval requirement are founded upon material which is secondary and derivative in nature, procured from brochures and internet sources and never disclosed to the appellant. Reliance upon such hearsay material without disclosing underlying documents and without affording an opportunity to controvert the same violates the principles of natural justice. Material adverse to a party must ordinarily be disclosed to enable effective opportunity of rebuttal. The mere existence of optional wireless functionality in certain models cannot lead to the conclusion that the imported machines were equipped with such functionality. Suspicion, however grave, cannot substitute proof. The equipment must be established as a wireless communication device by design through cogent and affirmative evidence. A multi-function printer with an optional wireless LAN port does not automatically become a wireless communication device requiring mandatory approval. In the absence of positive material evidencing that the imported devices were in fact fitted with wireless modules, the allegation remains in the realm of conjecture and surmise - The findings regarding Equipment Type Approval requirement are not supported by satisfactory and affirmative evidence and are set aside. Non-compliance with WPC requirements cannot be regarded as furnishing an independent or additional ground for confiscation - Compliance with Hazardous and Other Wastes (Management and Transboundary Movement) Rules, 2016 - Whether an importer holding valid EPR authorization and submitting prescribed documentation including country-of-origin certificate can be found non-compliant with hazardous waste rules on grounds of allegedly absent certificates and annual returns when this constituted a first-time import transaction – HELD - The Extended Producer Responsibility Authorization is itself a substantive compliance requirement envisaged under the statutory framework governing e-waste management and not merely a documentary formality. Once obtained from the competent authority and placed on record, it cannot be lightly disregarded while evaluating compliance. The country-of-origin certificate was consistently maintained to have been submitted with the Bills of Lading and packaging. In any event, CBIC Circular No. 07/2020 expressly contemplates situations where exporting country certificate is unavailable and permits post-import inspection by approved Chartered Engineers. The 100 percent first-check examination by Chartered Engineers in India constitutes the alternative mechanism expressly recognized by the Board itself. Insistence upon the exporting country certificate despite this recognized alternative appears misplaced. The requir
Download File
show more Judgements  

Quick Search

/

Advance Search

GST Resources

/

Gst Rate Finder

Weekly Summary

VIL Video

GSTAT Outreaches, Filing Intricacies...
By CA Vivek Jalan

Create Account

Security-Code
New Code?

Log In

New User ? Forgot Password ?

Forgot Password

Security-Code
New Code?
Please Note: This facility is only for Subscribing Members.

Email this page

Security-Code
New Code?

Feedback this page

Schedule a Demo

Schedule a demo to know the features and advantages of VILGST portal. Get to know the tips to find the desired results in faster way.

Security-Code
New Code?

Caselaw Request Form (CRF)

Didn’t find what you are searching for? No worries, please give us the following details and VIL will email you the desired Caselaws at the earliest:

Security-Code
New Code?