Import restriction under BIS rules cannot be stretched to used printers; provisional release upheld after confiscation basis failed.

Imported used multifunction printers/devices were treated as substantially identical to goods covered by earlier Tribunal precedent, which held that the Compulsory Registration Order cannot be extended beyond the parent BIS regime to impose import restrictions on such goods. Applying that reasoning, the machines were regarded as usable second-hand goods with residual life rather than hazardous waste, so the alleged customs prohibition was not sustainable. As confiscation under section 111(d) of the Customs Act, 1962 failed, the provisional release order was not faulted and was upheld.

---

---

Issues: Whether the imported used multifunction printers/devices were liable to confiscation on the basis of the BIS/Compulsory Registration Order restrictions and consequentially whether the order permitting provisional release required interference.

Analysis: The goods were held to be substantially identical to those considered earlier in the Tribunal's own precedent, where it was concluded that the Compulsory Registration Order could not be expanded beyond the parent BIS regime to impose import restrictions on such goods. The Tribunal also noted that, on the reasoning already accepted in that precedent, the imported machines were useful second-hand goods with residual life and not hazardous waste. On that basis, the customs prohibition alleged by the Revenue was not sustainable, and once confiscation under Section 111(d) of the Customs Act, 1962 failed, the provisional release ordered by the first appellate authority could not be faulted.

Conclusion: The confiscation basis pleaded by the Revenue was rejected, and the provisional release order was upheld; the Revenue's appeal was dismissed.

---