SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

2006 Supreme(Kar) 681

R.GURURAJAN, JAWAD RAHIM
BIG APPLE COMPUTERS A PROPRIETARY CONCERN REP. BY ITS PROPRIETREX MRS. SNEHALATA – Appellant
Versus
COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS AND THE COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS AND CE – Respondent


( 1 ) ASSESSEE is before us in this appeal challenging the order dtd 20-6-2005 passed by the cestat, South Zonal Bench, Bangalore.

( 2 ) FACTS in brief are as under; appellant imported 2160 pieces of used computer monitors from WRC International, USA at a price of US $ 4 per piece through Inland Container Depot, Sanath Nagar, Hyderabad-18 and filed bill of entry declaring a total value of import as Rs. 5,04,569/- at Rs. 233. 60 per monitor supported by invoice No. 100901-1 dtd 8-11-2001 of the aforesaid suppliers of goods. The appellant imported the said monitors under the bonafide belief that the second hand computer monitors falls under the definition of capital goods and further are permitted for import freely if they are less than 10 years old, as per the import policy and therefore there was no need for an import licence. However the customs authorities took the view that as per EXIM policy 1997-2002, the second hand goods imported are consumer goods and are restricted items requiring licence for imports. The goods were examined on first appraisement basis and the value of the goods was apprised at Rs. 600/- per monitor and the goods were not released. Since the appellant had












Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top