Home » SC beats camera maker Nikon, Samsung

SC beats camera maker Nikon, Samsung

The Supreme Court on Tuesday granted a major relief to multinationals Nikon, Canon, Sony and Samsung when it rescinded an order of the Central Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) and asked the companies to pay the basic customs duty for import duties. Retained the rebate granted to pay. Their digital still image video camera.

The waiver to pay the fee was based on the 2005 notification, which was amended in 2012.

The companies moved the apex court against CESTAT's order of 2107, which refused to grant them exemption, which led to confiscation of goods, demand for interest and fines under various sections of the Customs Act of 1962. Was.

DRI verb

The CESTAT order was based on an action by the Directorate of Revenue Intelligence (DRI) in 2012 to charge companies in Delhi for cameras imported by them. An Additional Director General of DRI issued notice under Section 28 (4) of Customs. Act to companies for collection of fees.

The DRI action was taken despite the cameras being cleared for import after a team led by the Deputy Commissioner of Customs at Delhi Airport was found eligible for duty exemption.

The DRI had argued that customs officials were “motivated” by “willful inaccurate statements and suppression of facts” about the cameras.

‘no right'

In a 21-page decision, Chief Justice of India Sharad A. The three-judge bench headed by Bobde said that the DRI has no authority to initiate recovery against the companies.

The Additional Director General of DRI was also not a “ officer” to authorize recovery.

Justice Bobde, who wrote the judgment, stated that the “proper officer” was the Customs or his successor as it was his office which initially assessed the cameras and found them fit for the exemption as per the notification.

“Where an officer has exercised his powers of assessment, the power to order revaluation should also be exercised by the same officer or his successor and not by any other officer of any other department, although he is an officer of the same rank. Is designated to be. In our view, this would result in the chaotic and uncontrolled operation of a statute, “the bench said in its ruling.

You have reached your limit for free articles this month.

Membership benefits included

Today's paper

Get a mobile-friendly version of the article from the newspaper of the day in an easy-to-read list.

unlimited access

reading as many articles as you want without any limitations.

Personal recommendations

A selected list of articles that match your interest and taste.

Fast page

Move seamlessly between articles as our pages load instantly.


One-stop-shop to see the latest updates and manage your preferences.


We inform you about the latest and most important events three times a day.

Support quality journalism.

* Our digital subscription plans currently do not include e-paper, crosswords and print.


About the author


Add Comment

Click here to post a comment