Per Justice U.L Bhat: Appellant imported five consignments of components and sub-assemblies of C.C.T-video Camera, one consignment under R.E.P. Licence and the other consignments under OGL. The first four consignments were packed in three cases. The fifth consignment was packed in a separate case. Examination showed that three cases contained electronic sub-assemblies and the fourth case contained plastic bodies of video camera and that all the imported goods, when put together formed complete sets of video cameras, Model JVC GX N. 5.E, in CKD condition. Import of video cameras was restricted as per entry 122 of Appendix 2 Part B of 1985-1988 Import Policy and required a specific licence which the appellant did not possesses. Invoice value was also found to be low. Show cause notice was issued in regard to the unauthorised import and misdeclaration of value. It was contended that appellant was a small scale manufacturer of video cameras and actual user of the imported goods, that the import was not of video cameras in SKD condition attracting entry 122 of Appendix 2 Part B but of components and sub-assemblies governed by other entries and the import of first consignment was supported by REP licence and import of goods in the other four consignments was under OGL and the invoice value was the correct value. The Deputy Collector of Customs overruled their contentions and held that the import was of complete sets of video cameras in SKD condition which required specific licence and the appellant did not produce any such valid licence for the complete sets. He also loaded the value. Accordingly confiscation was ordered, fixing redemption fine of rupees two lakhs and levying duty on the basis of the loaded value. This order has been confirmed by the Collector (Appeals). Hence this appeal.

2. The following are the particulars of Bills of Entry and the entitlement for import as claimed by the appellant:-

3. It is accepted by the appellant that goods imported under the five consignments, were complete sub-assemblies and plastic bodies of video cameras.. The lower authorities have held the import to be of video cameras in CKD condition attracting entry 122 of Appendix 2-Part B of 1985-88 Import Policy requiring specific licence. Admittedly the appellant did not possess a valid licence for import of goods falling under entry 122 of Appendix 2-Part B of the relevant Policy. The contention of the appellant is that Modules for Videocon Tubes and cables can be imported against the two REPs produced as per item in Appendix at serial number (d) against column 4 occurring against Export Product Group A.35of Appendix 17. It is further contended that the goods in the other four consignments fall under various entries in several Appendices referred to above which can be validly imported under OGL subject to actual user (Industrial) conditions. The factual basis of the contentions are not controverted in the order of the lower authorities. The Departmental Representative also did not controvert the factual basis of the above contentions of the appellant; according to him, these