VIDEOCON INTERNATIONAL LTD. Vs. COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE appellant had filed two bills of entry for clearance of Populated Printed Circuit Boards (PCBs) during August -September 1990. Clearance was sought against Additional Licences procured by the importer in terms of Para 216 of the Import and Export Policy, 1988 -91. The appellant wanted to clear the goods as an OGL item in terms of Entry No. 821(15), Appendix 6, List 8, Part I of the above Policy 1988 -91. The said entry stood for "Printed circuit boards other than those in Appendix 3 - part A". On examination of the goods and scrutiny of the provisions of the Policy, the Customs authorities took the stand that Populated PCBs were specifically covered by Appendix 2, part B, and therefore it was a restricted item which could be imported only against a specific import licence. The importer contested this stand of the department. Thus a dispute arose between the department and the appellant. The relevant show -cause notice was adjudicated upon by the ld. Collector of Customs by an order dated 30.4.1992. The ld. Collector held the Populated PCBs to be covered under Entry 135 of Appendix 2, Part B of the EXIM Policy, 88 -91 and, in the absence of specific import licence, he held the goods liable to confiscation under Section 111(d) of the Customs Act. As the goods were not available for confiscation, he imposed redemption fine in lieu of confiscation of the goods covered by both the bills of entry. The present appeal is directed against the Collector's order.

(2.) AFTER hearing the ld. counsel for the appellant and the ld. SDR for the respondent, we find that this case is fit to be summarily disposed of in the interest of judicial discipline. In the impugned order, the ld. Collector of Customs found that the substantive issue in the case was covered by a decision of this Tribunal vide Atari (India) Electronics v. CC : 1990 (45) ELT 321 (T). In the said case, this Tribunal had occasion to consider identical issue for an earlier period and construe the same in relation to import of loaded PCBs. Rival arguments which were made with reference to the provisions of Import Policy 1985 -88 were considered and the provisions were examined in detail. In the result, Loaded PCBs (which are, admittedly, otherwise called Populated PCBs) imported by M/s. Atari (India) Electronics were held to be importable under OGL. The present appellant heavily relied on that decision before the Collector of Customs. Ld. Collector, however, refused to follow the precedent. He chose to embark on independent interpretation of the provisions of the EXIM policy and arrived at his own conclusions. While doing so, he also made certain references to, and remarks about, the Tribunal's decision in Atari (India) Electronics case. We refrain from commenting itemwise on the Collector's references/remarks as, we think, it is beyond the scope of this appeal. The relevant paragraphs (16 to 21) are reproduced below:

(3.) ANOTHER aspect needs mention. The department had filed a reference application with the Tribunal against the order passed in Atari (India) Electronics case, but that application was dismissed as time -barred. Against an order of the Tribunal dismissing a reference application, there was a remedy in law in those days but the department never chose to take recourse to it. Consequently, the Tribunal's decision in Atari (India) Electronics case attained finality and the same was only liable to be followed in the similar case of M/s Videocon International Ltd.