2014 (9) TMI 679

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....oner of Customs (I & G) confiscating the goods imported by the respondent without any requisite licence from the DGFT and WPC (Ministry of Telecommunication and Information Technology) and further imposing a penalty of Rs. 5 lakhs under Section 112(a) of the Customs Act, 1962 (Act, in short). 2. The relevant facts in brief are that the respondent had filed bill of entry No. 7687005 dated August 17, 2012 for clearance of goods declared as "Transmitter Broadcasting Equipment Sub-system (Data Processing Unit with transmitting capabilities for broadcasting), software and other standard accessories" which were valued at US Dollar 91,500. The assessable value of the goods worked out to be Rs. 51,70,619/-. On examination, to ascertain the correct....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....nd that the correct and most suitable classification of the impugned goods would be under CTH 8525 5020 which provides for "TV broadcast transmitter under the main heading of "Transmission apparatus. I also find that the impugned goods are specifically for transmission purpose and not for one to one communication. The device is essentially a standalone piece which is between frontend (camera etc.) and back end (studio). Essentially the equipment is meant for transmission of live video between the field reporter and studio. The signal is captured by devices such as cameras (not part of this equipment), which get relayed to the studio which this device with the help of GSM Cellular network. At the other end, the studio (not part of this equi....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... to either broadcast live programmes to the studio or to live + broadcast server or live+ streaming server. It was also the conclusion that the equipment imported is neither a radio broadcast equipment nor T.V. broadcast transmitter and every transmitter is not a transmitter for public reception. According to the Tribunal, the equipment is only for transmitting audio-video signal from one place to another and not capable of transmitting the signals to be received by the general public and set aside the order-in-original. 6. Mr.Satish Kumar, learned standing counsel for the appellant would reiterate the stand of the appellant before the Tribunal and contend that the equipment imported is a Television broadcast transmitter and as per the imp....