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

B.B.GUJRAL, A.J.F.D’SOUZA, M.SANTHANAM
United Offset Process (P. ) Ltd. – Appellant
Versus
Collector of Customs, Bombay – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
V.N. Deshpande,K.V. Kunhikrishnan

ORDER

M. Santhanam, Member (J)

1. The appellants have preferred the appeal against the order of the Appellate Collector of Customs, Bombay, in Order-in-Appeal No. 4161/82 BCH dated 27-7-1982 confirming the order of the Asstt. Collector of less-charge demand for Rs. 7,60,032.72.

2. The appellants imported a consignment of colour scanner C-299 and other accessories by air Flight No. DL-353 dated 20-4-1980. In the relevant Bill of Entry, they showed items under Tariff Heading 84.35. The appellants contend that the colour scanner is intended to analyse the colour of a composite transparency or a colour bromide and finally produces four different positives and negatives on graphic art films. The colour scanner also analyses any transparency into four basic colours, viz., yellow, magenta, black and blue. The appellants submit that the colour scanner imported is capable of being used as ancillary equipment in the printing industry only. The assessing officer scored off the Heading 84.35 and inserted the heading 90.25(1) of the Customs Tariff Act. On 26-7-1980, a letter No. S/2-2659/80-81 ACU was sent demanding a sum of Rs. 7,60,032.72. The appellants pointed out that the scanner was used onl

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