Binding precedent barred redemption fine and penalty for used digital copiers, while liability survived for analogue photocopiers.

Redemption fine and penalties were not sustainable for imported old and used digital multifunction print and copier machines because an identical dispute had already been decided in favour of the importers and that view had been upheld by the jurisdictional High Court. The Tribunal therefore set aside the monetary consequences for those goods. For the imported analogue photocopiers, no favourable finding had been recorded for the appellants, so the confiscation-related consequences and the quantified redemption fine and penalty were maintained. The result was partial relief: the appeals succeeded only in relation to the digital multifunction machines, while liability continued for the analogue photocopiers.

---

---

Issues: (i) Whether redemption fine and penalty were sustainable in respect of imported old and used digital multifunction print and copier machines; (ii) Whether redemption fine and penalty were sustainable in respect of analogue photocopiers imported in certain appeals.

Issue (i): Whether redemption fine and penalty were sustainable in respect of imported old and used digital multifunction print and copier machines.

Analysis: The Tribunal noted that the identical dispute had already been decided in favour of the importers in an earlier case, and that decision had been upheld by the jurisdictional High Court. In view of that binding precedent, the Tribunal held that the imported used digital multifunction machines could not be visited with redemption fine and penalties on the basis adopted in the impugned orders.

Conclusion: The redemption fine and penalties imposed on the appellants in respect of the digital multifunction machines were set aside.

Issue (ii): Whether redemption fine and penalty were sustainable in respect of analogue photocopiers imported in certain appeals.

Analysis: For the analogue photocopiers, the Tribunal recorded that no finding had been given in favour of the appellants. On that basis, the confiscation-related consequences were not disturbed and the duty-related penal consequences were maintained.

Conclusion: The appellants remained liable to pay the redemption fine and penalty quantified against the analogue photocopiers.

Final Conclusion: The common order granted relief only for the digital multifunction machines and maintained the monetary liability relating to analogue photocopiers, resulting in a partial allowance of the appeals.

Ratio Decidendi: Where an identical issue has already been finally decided in favour of the assessee and that view has been upheld by the jurisdictional High Court, redemption fine and penalty on the same class of imported goods are not sustainable.

---