2006 (8) TMI 487

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....s alleging mis-declaration and fraudulent availment of duty concession in terms of Notification No. 16/2000 dated 1-3-2000. The importer M/s. Wipro GE Medical Systems got the matter settled before the Settlement Commission. The appellants have now filed an appeal against the imposition of penalty for various allegations made against them in assisting the importer in clearing the goods by wrongly availing the benefit of Notification. On the same set of facts in respect of the same goods imported by M/s. Wipro GE Medical Systems, a Show Cause Notice had been issued by the DRI, Mumbai. The same officer had given both the Show Cause Notices. The Show Cause Notice issued by the Mumbai DRI was adjudicated and that matter was taken up in appeal be....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... set aside the penalty. The findings recorded in the said order is reproduced herein below. "The case in brief is that M/s. Wipro GE Medical Systems, Bangalore (herein after referred to as "WGEMS) imported Computerized Tomography Scanners Model E (hereinafter referred to as "CT/e") mis-declaring them as parts and fraudulently availed the benefit of concessional rate of duty applicable to parts for manufacture of CT/e in terms of Notification No. 16/2000 dated 1-3-2000. Duty demand was raised on the goods imported at Mumbai as well as at Bangalore and notice also proposed imposition of penalty in addition to the proposal for confiscation of the goods. The notice also proposed imposition of penalty on the appellants herein, who are CHA of ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....laration under Kar Vivad Samadhan (KVS) Scheme and issue was finally settled in their favour, penalty imposed on co-noticee does not arise [The Supreme Court in the case of Union of India v. Onkar S. Kanwar - 2002 (145) E.L.T. 266 (S.C.) has held that settlement by main declarant under the scheme operates as full and final settlement in respect of other persons on whom show cause notice issued in respect of the same]. The other submission made by the appellants is that in the case of the importers, the Tribunal vide its order reported in 1999 (106) E.L.T. 169 hold that although by applying legal fiction of Interpretative Rule 2(a), import by M/s. WGEMS of CAT Scan in CKD & SKD condition was to be treated as import of complete system, but fo....