https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=355646 Used audio visual equipment imported by a service provider was treated as capital goods under the Foreign Trade Policy following a subsequent DGFT clarification, so the restriction on second hand goods did not require an import licence. On that basis, the Customs Act confiscation could not stand, and the related redemption fine and penalty were set aside. The decision turns on the importer's status as a provider of audio visual services and the clarificatory position that such equipment qualified as capital goods for that use. en-us Fri, 08 Dec 2017 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 28 Feb 2019 11:58:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=355646 Used audio visual equipment imported by a service provider was treated as capital goods under the Foreign Trade Policy following a subsequent DGFT clarification, so the restriction on second hand goods did not require an import licence. On that basis, the Customs Act confiscation could not stand, and the related redemption fine and penalty were set aside. The decision turns on the importer's status as a provider of audio visual services and the clarificatory position that such equipment qualified as capital goods for that use. Case-Laws Customs Fri, 08 Dec 2017 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=355646