The appellant has sent the imported goods back abroad for repair and got back after some time. At the time of import, the appellant has claimed that since there is no excise duty on repaired goods in India, there should not be any countervailing duty (CVD) on imported goods. He argued that Since, in the present case, no manufacturing process has taken place and the magnetic heads have simply been repaired, the CVD was not leviable. 

Tribunal has rejected the appeal of the appellant on the ground that, " in view of Section 20 of the Act on the re-importation of goods, the duty leviable would be the same as would have been levied on the importation of goods for the first time."

Appellant had preferred an appeal before the honorable Supreme Court. The apex court in its order (Reported in 2008 -TMI - 3586 - Supreme Court) has held that:

"Tribunal cannot be found fault with.  Under Section 20 of the Customs Act, 1962 read with the definition of "import" as given in clause (23) of Section 2 imported goods would include re-imported goods as well and therefore the goods sent out of India and re-imported would also be liable to payment of duty in the same manner in which they would have been liable  if imported for the first time in India." 

(For full text of judgment - visit 2008 -TMI - 3586 - Supreme Court)

Re importation treated as import: repaired goods returned attract countervailing duty as on first time importation. Re-imported goods returned after repair are treated as imports for duty purposes; the statutory definition of import includes re-imports and requires duties on re-importation to be the same as would apply on first-time importation, thereby attracting countervailing duty even where no domestic exciseable manufacturing occurred.