ORDER
V.P. Gulati, Member (T)
1. This is an appeal against the order of the Collector of Customs, Bangalore, dated 9-2-88. Brief facts of the case are the appellants imported a computer system and claimed clearance of the same under OGL against Sl. No. 8 of Appendix 6 read with para 58(2) of the Policy Book. The lower authority’s objection to the import was that the appellants had not imported the configuration as indicated in the Policy inasmuch as they had not imported the Console which has been set out as an essential component part of the computer system permissible for import. The appellants’ plea before the lower authority was that they got a keyboard and a monitor which in conjunction with each other function as a Console. The learned Collector, however, has held that for a unit to be considered as a Console it was necessary that through this it should be possible to input the instructions to the CPU. The appellants had placed before the learned Collector a certificate issued by the Department of Computer Science and Automation, Indian Institute of Science, Bangalore, in support of their plea that the keyboard and the monitor constitute a Console. The learned Collector, however, has not given any finding in regard to the authoritative opinion placed before him.
2. The learned Consultant for the appellants pleaded that the computer system imported by them answered to the description of the system as allowed under the Policy. He drew my attention to the certificate issued by the Department of Computer Science and Automation and the definition of ‘Console’ as given in “A Dictionary of Computer” by N.R. Spencer. The said definition is reproduced below for convenience of reference:
” Console : The workstation from which the operation of a computer system can be monitored and controlled. In current systems the console is usually a desk-height surface supporting a keyboard and one or more VDUs and reference documents. There may also be a number of other switches and indicators mounted on a panel. In early systems the control unit at the console was often a teleprinter. As systems became larger and more sophisticated the consoles first became more complex and then much simpler as the development of operating systems advanced. Some recent medium-sized systems do not have a console.”
3. The learned Consultant pleads that the learned lower authority has not taken note of this definition of ‘console’ and passed orders without referring to any authority in support of his finding.
4. The learned JDR for the Department adopted the reasoning given in the order-in-original.
5. It is observed that the appellants had ordered for a computer system and there is no adverse finding that what has been imported is not a computer system. The question that falls for my consideration is whether this system, among other things, has a console also. The reason given by the learned Collector for holding that the console had not been imported as a part of the system is that the monitor can only display the instructions to the CPU and cannot be used to input the instructions and also that it can display the output from the computer. The plea of the appellants is that the keyboard although not directly connected with the monitor is connected to the CPU and so also is the monitor and this arrangement in conjunction performs the function of a console. The learned Consultant has explained that through the keyboard the instructions are fed into the CPU and the monitor displays the instructions given as also the result of the instructions given. It is observed that the appellants had also produced before the lower authority a certificate from the Indian Institute of Science and also has referred to an authority as to what constitutes a console. The learned lower authority has not given any finding in regard to that nor has cited any authority in support of his findings given in the impugned order. It is observed that the console is defined in the McGraw-Hill Dictionary of Computers as under :
“Console : The section of a computer that is used to control the machine manually, correct errors, manually revise the contents of storage, and provide communication in other ways between the operator or service engineer and the central processing unit.”
The learned Collector himself has stated that the monitor displays the output from the CPU. The appellants’ plea is that through the keyboard the instructions are fed into the computer and to that extent control can be exercised on the CPU through the keyboard. From the definition of ‘console’ given in the McGraw-Hill Dictionary of Computers it is clear in the light of the certificate produced and the pleas made that the appellants’ set of the keyboard and monitor constitutes a console and to that extent the appellants’ system can be said to be incorporating the console also. It is observed that the learned lower authority has not relied upon any technical literature or definition as to what constitutes a console. In view of what has been set out above, I hold the order of the lower authority is not maintainable and the same is set aside and the appeal of the appellants is allowed.
