TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2020 (12) TMI 920
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... JUDGMENT Vinod Chandran, J. This batch of appeals deal with similar situation on facts and law, as has already been considered by another Division Bench in Annexure-3 judgment, which has been confirmed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Annexure-4 judgment; rejecting the connected Civil Appeals filed by the Revenue. Sri.P.R.Sreejith, learned Standing Counsel for the Revenue, submits that he has two additional contentions on the very same set of facts. We have also heard Sri.P.A.Augustian, who appeared for the respondents. 2. The controversy revolves around the import of Multi Function Devices (MFDs) for use within the country. Admittedly in India there is no manufacture of MFDs and those imported are used equipments, which have ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... (vi) An acknowledged copy of the annual return filed with the concerned State Pollution Control Board (SPCB) for import during the previous financial year; (vii) MFD shall be for printing A3 size and above". 3. Admittedly there was no import licence or authorization issued by the Directorate General, Foreign Trade ['DGFT' for brevity]. As far as the 'country of origin certificate', it was found that there was an ambiguity since there existed no guidance to understand the word 'origin', whether it is of, the shipment, the manufacture or the country in which it was used before import. But noticing the certificate issued by the Inspection Agency, approved by the DGFT, that the imported MFDs have a function....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....rol Board is also only after the MFDs lose its functionality, i.e., after five years, which is the EPR Authorization obtained by the importer. The MFDs admittedly were for printing A3 size and above. 4. It was also found that H&OW Rules 2016 speaks of re-export under Rule 15, which speaks of 'illegal traffic'. No violation of the Rules having been found and the imported goods being one categorized as 'other waste'; which is not a restricted item, this Court interfered with the re-export directed by the Customs authorities. As far as violation under the Foreign Trade Act, it was held that Section 11 provides for confiscation and also redemption in lieu of confiscation which redemption is permitted only on payment of market....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....usion of wastes contained in this Schedule does not preclude the use of Schedule II to demonstrate that the waste is not hazardous. In case of dispute, the matter would be referred to the Technical Review committee constituted by Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change'. Schedule-I is the 'List of Processes Generating Hazardous Wastes' and Schedule-II 'List of Waste Constituents with Concentration Limits'. The two different Lists as per the extract above, is to differentiate the waste with specified concentrations in Schedule-II, when generated under a process in Schedule-I, which all the same could be categorized as non-hazardous. It is in case of any dispute as to whether a waste generated would be hazard....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e notice that there is no standard prescribed for MFDs in the said Order. 8. The learned Standing Counsel would however refer to Anneuxure-23 issued by BIS with respect to General Requirements of Information Technology Equipment and the generic product type as available in the Table under Clause 1.1.1. The Table refers to 'data and text processing machines and associated equipment'. The specific examples of generic type as provided in that Table itself includes 'printers, scanners, text processing equipment and visual display units'. We have to immediately notice that the MFDs are a combination of these specific examples noticed and such an equipment in combination is not manufactured within India. 9. The further relia....