TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2022 (7) TMI 1520
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....(Appeals) has given very cogent reasons in his decision dated 18th April 2017 reversing the order in original and holding that the subject goods were accessories. The goods in question are linear accelerator with IMRT for radiological use in the detection of cancerous turnovers. According to the Commissioner (Appeals), the imported goods with the descriptions Lot-1 upgrade to IGRT and Lot-2 upgrade to Rapid ARC were accessories which enhanced the efficiency of the linear accelerator. Hence, they were exibilble to a concessional rate of duty as opposed to the claim of the revenue tht they were "parts" of the linear accelerator with such benefit. Aggrieved the revenue preferred an appeal before the tribunal. Before the tribunal the question....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e of imported items as "accessory" was mentioned. The same was covered as "Parts and Accessories of Medical Radiotherpy Equipment". 5. From the above, it appears that the imported items were fully and correctly declared in the bills of entry and the Adjudicating Authority/ Department has not contradicted the description, value or any other material particular declared on the goods in the bill of entry. When it is so, then we find no reason to interfere with the impugned order. Accordingly, the impugned order is hereby upheld for the reasons mentioned therein." 3. On the basis of intelligence an investigation was under-taken by DRI, and a Show Cause Notice, was issued to wherein respondent was called to show cause as to why:- "(i) The c....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....iscation under Section 111(m) of the Customs Act, 1962. (vi) Penalty under Section 112(a) or Section 114A of the Customs Act, 1062, should not be imposed on them for their willful acts and omissions, as discussed above." 4. This Show Cause Notice was adjudicated by the Assistant Commissioner of Customs confirming the demands in the Show Cause Notice by imposing of penalties on the appellant. On appeal, Ld. Commissioner (Appeals) vide the impugned order, set aside the order the Assistant Commissioner. Revenue filed the appeal before the Tribunal which was earlier decided as per the Final order indicated in para 2. 5. Revenue challenged this order before the Hon'ble High Court. As per order in para 1 remanded the matter for passing an spe....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....toms about proper and correct declaration of import items made on the bill of entry and payment of correct and appropriate duty assessed thereon. 8. The fact no disputed is that the Linac was already operational with the above referred Dr. Bhimrao Ambedkar Memorial Hospital since the 2010 and the goods imported in 2012 wherein only to enhance the capabilities of the said machine already operational. Contention of Revenue is that the goods imported are nothing parts of the machine imported 2010 whereas contention of respondent is that these are accessories. 9. We find that Hon'ble Supreme Court has in case Mehra Bros. - Vs. Joint Commercial Tax Officer, 1991(51) E.L.T. 173 (S.C.) has held "accessories" to be adjuncts, accompaniments for en....