https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=394514 Old and used multifunction devices and printers imported without authorization were treated as restricted goods, not prohibited goods, so absolute confiscation was not justified and redemption under section 125 of the Customs Act, 1962 had to be considered. The hazardous-waste characterisation was rejected, and the applicable waste schedule was treated as satisfied, so the more stringent hazardous-waste regime could not be used to defeat redemption. Objections based on compulsory registration and BIS standards also failed because the composite multifunction device was not shown to fall within the specific goods covered by that regime, and standards for individual constituent machines were held inapplicable. The matter was remitted only for fresh determination of redemption fine and penalty. en-us Fri, 20 Dec 2019 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 15 Apr 2020 13:28:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=394514 Old and used multifunction devices and printers imported without authorization were treated as restricted goods, not prohibited goods, so absolute confiscation was not justified and redemption under section 125 of the Customs Act, 1962 had to be considered. The hazardous-waste characterisation was rejected, and the applicable waste schedule was treated as satisfied, so the more stringent hazardous-waste regime could not be used to defeat redemption. Objections based on compulsory registration and BIS standards also failed because the composite multifunction device was not shown to fall within the specific goods covered by that regime, and standards for individual constituent machines were held inapplicable. The matter was remitted only for fresh determination of redemption fine and penalty. Case-Laws Customs Fri, 20 Dec 2019 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=394514