2024 (3) TMI 1250

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....consumption, despite admitting the fact that the condition of para 2.31 of the Foreign Trade Policy are not satisfied? ii) Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case, the finding of the CESTAT that the Electronics and Information Technology Goods (Requirement of Compulsory Registration) Order, 2012 (CRO, 2012) is beyond the Act and Rules is erroneous or not, on the face that the CRO itself is formulated under the provisions of Bureau of Indian Standards Act (BIS Act), which regulates the imported goods as well? iii) Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case, the CESTAT is right in overlooking the CRO, 2012, which covers Multifunctional and Printers/ Devices (MFDs) along with printers and plotters?" 2. According to the ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... 12846 of 2019 seeking a direction to the appellant to assess and clear the goods upon payment of applicable duties on value, as determined by the Chartered Engineer. By order dated 25.06.2019, the said writ petition came to be allowed by directing the department to conduct adjudication of consignment in terms of the applicable statutory provisions. Pursuant to such order, an order was passed determining the value of the goods as Rs. 23,10,504/- in terms of Rule 9 of CVR 2007 and further ordered confiscation of 136 units of goods and imposed penalty of Rs. 2,30,000/- under Section 112 (a) and redemption fine of Rs. 3,50,000/- under Section 125 of the Customs Act together with penalty of Rs. 25,000/- under Section 117 of The Customs Act. Agg....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....been withheld. The relevant portion of the Andhra Pradesh High Court order is extracted hereunder: "There is no explanation forthcoming as to the contradiction between the Foreign Trade Policy 2015-20 which came into effect from 01.04.2015 and the notification dated 17.01.2017. It is however an admitted fact that the petitioner firm suffered the Order-in-Original dated 05.07.2017 passed by the Joint Commissioner of Customs, Kolkata, confiscating its first consignment under Sections 111(d) and 111(m) of the Customs Act, 1962 but permitting it the option of redeeming the said goods on payment of fine of Rs. 3,30,000/- under Section 125 thereof and penalty of Rs. 1,45,000/- under Section 112(a) thereof. The petitioner firm admits that it pai....