TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>Automatic Film Processor qualifies for customs duty exemption as paper processor under Notification No. 11/77-Cus.</h1> The Tribunal upheld that the imported Automatic Film Processor, also functioning as a paper processor, was eligible for the benefit under Notification No. ... Film processor Issues:1. Eligibility of the imported Automatic Film Processor for the benefit of Notification No. 11/77-Cus., dated 15-01-1977.The appeal was filed by the Revenue against the Collector of Customs (Appeals) Order, contending that the Automatic Film Processor imported is not eligible for the benefit of Notification No. 11/77-Cus. The grounds of appeal highlighted that the processor is essential for the phototype setting method in the printing industry, where film and paper are processed alternatively. It was argued that the processor's function is not composite or complementary, as it is specifically designed for the phototype setting method. The appeal emphasized the distinction between film processors, film/paper processors, and plate processors in the printing industry, stating that each serves a different purpose based on the printing method used. The Revenue's position was that the imported film/paper processor does not fall under the scope of the said customs notification.The Collector of Customs (Appeals) referred to a previous decision by CEGAT in the case of M/s. Andhra Patrika, where it was held that Notification No. 11/77 covers processors capable of working on both paper and film. The Collector noted that the imported machine functions as both a Film Processor and a paper processor, making it ineligible for the specific benefit under Notification No. 11/77. The Collector also cited another Tribunal decision involving the same Bench, which supported the interpretation that the notification applies only to automatic Film Processors used in offset printing, not film/paper processors used in phototype setting. The Revenue reiterated their grounds of appeal, emphasizing the distinction between the types of processors and the specific usage requirements in the printing industry.Upon reviewing the case, the Tribunal examined Notification No. 11/77-Cus., which exempts automatic film processors for use in the printing industry from a portion of the customs duty. The Tribunal observed that the imported machine operated as both a Film Processor and a paper processor. Citing a previous case, the Tribunal highlighted that the machine satisfied the conditions under the notification's proviso, as it was intended for the printing industry. The Tribunal emphasized that the notification should not be interpreted in a way that renders it redundant and referred to previous judgments to support their decision. Given that a similar machine was previously held to be covered by the exemption notification, the Tribunal dismissed the Revenue's appeal, affirming that the imported processor qualified for the benefit under Notification No. 11/77-Cus.In conclusion, the Tribunal upheld the decision that the imported Automatic Film Processor, which also functioned as a paper processor, was eligible for the benefit under Notification No. 11/77-Cus., dismissing the Revenue's appeal against the Collector of Customs (Appeals) order.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
