https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=47722 Second-hand photocopiers imported before the amendment were treated as second-hand goods, not freely importable capital goods. The Kerala HC read the Foreign Trade Policy with the DGFT circulars and held that such machines fall within the second-hand goods category under paragraph 2.17, do not satisfy the definition of capital goods under paragraph 9.10, and are not freely importable under paragraph 2.33. It further held that the DGFT clarification was binding under paragraph 2.3 and was not confined to the EPCG Scheme. The later amendment requiring import against licence did not change the position for the imports in question, so the importer failed. en-us Fri, 07 Apr 2006 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 12 Mar 2024 12:11:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=47722 Second-hand photocopiers imported before the amendment were treated as second-hand goods, not freely importable capital goods. The Kerala HC read the Foreign Trade Policy with the DGFT circulars and held that such machines fall within the second-hand goods category under paragraph 2.17, do not satisfy the definition of capital goods under paragraph 9.10, and are not freely importable under paragraph 2.33. It further held that the DGFT clarification was binding under paragraph 2.3 and was not confined to the EPCG Scheme. The later amendment requiring import against licence did not change the position for the imports in question, so the importer failed. Case-Laws Customs Fri, 07 Apr 2006 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=47722