{"id":125856,"date":"2006-10-19T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2006-10-18T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/commissioner-of-customs-vs-ms-spice-telecom-bangalore-on-19-october-2006"},"modified":"2018-05-09T23:54:02","modified_gmt":"2018-05-09T18:24:02","slug":"commissioner-of-customs-vs-ms-spice-telecom-bangalore-on-19-october-2006","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/commissioner-of-customs-vs-ms-spice-telecom-bangalore-on-19-october-2006","title":{"rendered":"Commissioner Of Customs, … vs M\/S Spice Telecom, Bangalore on 19 October, 2006"},"content":{"rendered":"
Supreme Court of India<\/div>\n
Commissioner Of Customs, … vs M\/S Spice Telecom, Bangalore on 19 October, 2006<\/div>\n
Author: Bhan<\/div>\n
Bench: Ashok Bhan, Altamas Kabir, Dalveeer Bhandari<\/div>\n
           CASE NO.:\nAppeal (civil)  1695 of 2006\n\nPETITIONER:\nCommissioner of Customs, Bangalore\n\nRESPONDENT:\nM\/s Spice Telecom, Bangalore\n\nDATE OF JUDGMENT: 19\/10\/2006\n\nBENCH:\nAshok Bhan, Altamas Kabir & Dalveeer Bhandari\n\nJUDGMENT:\n<\/pre>\n
J U D G M E N T<\/p>\n
BHAN, J.\n<\/p>\n
\tThe question that arises in the present appeal is whether
\nRadio Terminals imported by the respondent-assessee (for
\nshort the Respondent) should be considered as ‘Base
\nTransceivers Station (BTS) ancillary equipment’ in order to be
\ngiven the benefit of exemption Notification No. 11\/97-Cus.
\nDated 1.3.1997, as amended by Notification No. 51\/97 dated
\n2.6.1997.\n<\/p>\n
Exemption Notification and its relevant entries :\n<\/p>\n
  \tThe Central Government in exercise of powers conferred
\nby sub-section (1) of Section 25 of the Customs Act, 1962
\nissued a notification No. 11\/97 dated 01.03.1997 in public
\ninterest to exempt certain goods  mentioned in the table of the
\nnotification read with relevant list appended thereto from
\npayment of duty imported into India either in entirety or
\npartially.\n<\/p>\n
Notification No. 11\/97 was amended  by Notification No.
\n51\/97 on 2.6.1997 to include certain other goods from
\npayment of duty or partial duty.  Relevant entries in List 9-B
\nare:\n<\/p>\n
“1.\tTelephonic or telegraphic apparatus of the following
\ndescription:\n<\/p>\n
(a)\tswitching apparatus for cellular mobile
\ntelephone service.\n<\/p>\n
\t(b)\tbase station controllers.\n<\/p>\n
2.\tRadio communication equipment including VHS,
\nUHF and microwave communication equipment
\nwith following description:\n<\/p>\n
\t(a)\tbase transceivers  stations (BTS)
\n\txxx\t\t\t\txxx\n<\/p>\n
5.\tBTS ancillary equipment.”\n<\/p>\n
\t\t\t\t\t\t\t[ Emphasis supplied ]<\/p>\n
Facts:\n<\/p>\n
Respondent placed a purchase order  on M\/s Italter SPA,
\nItaly, for the supply of 30 sets of Radio Terminals  amongst
\nother items.  Respondent cleared the said items at customs
\non payment of applicable duties in a sum of Rs. 64,80,572\/-
\nwithout  exemption  but under protest.  In the bill of entry the
\ngoods were classified as falling under Entry No. 8525.2009.\n<\/p>\n
\tRespondent had  cleared identical goods imported at New
\nDelhi and claimed benefit of Notification No. 11\/97 as
\namended by Notification No. 51\/97.  The Bill of Entry
\ndescribed the goods as radio equipment SRAL\/7GHZ by the
\n8\/2 MBPS under Tariff Heading 8525.20.  Based on the
\nRespondent’s submissions and representation, Delhi Customs
\nextended the benefit of the said notification to the goods
\nimported by the Respondent.\n<\/p>\n
Respondent filed a refund claim for an amount of R.
\n34,73,385\/- on 26.8.1999 for the goods imported at
\nBangalore.  Respondent in the refund claim had annexed
\nthereto technical literature and details explaining the nature of
\nthe equipment to show that radio terminals are to be classified
\neither as ‘BTS’  equipment or ‘ BTS ancillary equipment’.\n<\/p>\n
\tDeputy Commissioner of Customs (Refunds) Bangalore
\nby his order dated 10.4.2000 rejected the Respondent’s claim
\nfor exemption by holding that radio terminals  are only
\ninterconnectivity apparatus  between BTS and the Main
\nSwitching Centre (MSC).  Deputy Commissioner took the view
\nthat the notification gives exemption only to BTS and not to
\nparts. Radio terminals have an independent function and
\nidentity and therefore are not a part of BTS or MSC.   It was
\naccordingly held that the radio terminal is only part of cellular
\nnetwork and the same cannot be treated either as BTS itself or
\nas an ancillary of BTS equipment.\n<\/p>\n
Aggrieved by the order dated 10.4.2000 the respondent
\npreferred an appeal before the Commissioner of Appeals who
\nby his order dated 13.3.2003  dismissed the appeal by holding
\nthat merely because the radio terminals are co-located at the
\nsame site, it does not  mean that the said equipment is a  part
\nof the main equipment.   The technical literature filed by the
\nrespondent was disregarded and instead of applying the test of
\nco-location of the equipment dismissed the appeal.\n<\/p>\n
\tAggrieved by the order of Commissioner of Appeals
\nrespondent filed an appeal before the Customs, Excise and
\nService Tax Appellate Tribunal, South Zonal bench at
\nBangalore (for short “the Tribunal”).  The Tribunal by its order
\ndated 20.5.2005 after taking into consideration the technical
\nliterature held that the radio terminals and antenna are
\nancillary equipments of BTS and without radio terminals there
\ncannot be interconnectivity in the network system. The
\nTribunal accordingly granted the benefit of the exemption
\nnotification as had been given by the Delhi Customs House.
\nAggrieved by the same revenue has come up in appeal.\n<\/p>\n
Discussion :\n<\/p>\n
It is the case of the respondent that the radio terminals
\nimported by it are BTS ancillary equipments, essential for
\nproviding connectivity for use of cellular phones.  Whereas
\naccording to the Revenue the radio terminals are independent
\nequipment having independent identity and function and are
\nnot ancillary equipments of BTS and are not covered under the
\nsaid exemption notification.\n<\/p>\n
What is exempted under the notification is Base
\nTransmeter Station (BTS) or BTS ancillary equipment.
\nAncillary has been assigned the meaning in various
\ndictionaries  as :\n<\/p>\n
” P. Ramanatha Aiyar: The Lax Lexicon:
\n“aiding auxiliary; subordinate; attendant
\nupon; that which aids or promotes a
\nproceeding regarded as the principal.
\nA work is said to be “ancillary or
\nincidental” to a thing, trade, or business
\nwhen it is not necessary thereto or a
\nprimary part thereof.”\n<\/p>\n
Stroud’s Judicial Dictionary:\n<\/p>\n
“A work is said o be “ancillary or
\nincidental” to a trade or business when it
\nis not necessary thereto or a primary part
\nthereof.”\n<\/p>\n
This Court in Vareed Jacob vs. Sosamma Geevarghese,<\/a>
\n2004 (6) SCC 378, has accepted  the meaning assigned to the
\nword “ancillary”  in The Lax Lexicon:\n<\/p>\n
“The expression “ancillary” means; aiding
\nauxiliary; subordinate; attendant upon;
\nthat which aids or promotes a proceeding
\nregarded as the principal.”\n<\/p>\n
\tIn order to understand the nature of the goods, a brief
\nbackground of the cellular network system is required to be
\nunderstood, as per literature supplied to us on which the
\nreliance was placed by the Tribunal as well.\n<\/p>\n
\t” A Cellular Network comprises of Main
\nSwitching Centre (MSC) operating in tandem with
\nthe following:\n<\/p>\n
?\tBase Transceiver Stations
\n?\tBase Station Controller
\n?\tTranscoder
\n?\tOperation Maintenance Centre (OMC-R)
\n?\tDigital Cross Connect Systems.\n<\/p>\n
BASE TRANSCEIVER STATION:\n<\/p>\n
The Base Transceiver Station is the interface
\nbetween the cellular network and the mobile
\nsubscriber.  The basic funbction is to receiver
\nand transmit mobile calls from the subscriber
\nto the caller through the GSM cellular network
\nsupported by BTS equipment and the following
\nanciallary equipments of BTS:\n<\/p>\n
?\tMiscrowave Communication Equipments
\n(Radio Terminals & Antennas).\n<\/p>\n
?\tPower Converter Unit
\n?\tBattery Back-up Unit
\n?\tGSM & Miscrowave Antennas
\n?\tInstallation\/Ancillary Items.\n<\/p>\n
BTS equipment is a 19 inch cabinet consisting
\nof Transceiver Control Units, RF modules like
\nCombiner band pass filter, duplexer,
\nintegrated antenna distribution unit (IADU),
\nDigital Cage consisting of Main Control Unit
\n(MCU), Fibre optic extender (FOX), Network
\nInterface unit (NIU), power supplies (NPSM &
\nBPSM) and interconnecting feeder cables. The
\nBTS equipment operates in 900 MHz GSM
\nBand.  The speech is converted into digital
\nmode by the mobile and sent to the BTS
\nsituated at the caller’s area at 13 kbps and is
\nfurther transported to the BSC  at 64 kbps
\nthrough the microwave radio terminal, which
\nis further routed to the MSC at 2 Mbps.  The
\nBTS controls the operation of the subscriber
\nand enables handovers between cell (BTS)
\nwhen the mobile subscriber is traveling.\n<\/p>\n
MISCROWAVE COMMUNICATION
\nEQUIPMENTS (RADIO TERMINALS &
\nANTENNAS):\n<\/p>\n
The Miscrowave Communication Equipment
\ncomprises of radio terminals and Antennas.
\nThe radio terminal is made-up of Indoor units
\nand outdoor units.  The indoor unit consists of
\nMultiplexer, base Band Unit.  The Miscrowave
\nEquipment operates at 7 Ghz\/15 Ghz\/23 Ghz
\nRadio Frequency and transports the already
\nconverted digital speech and control
\ninformation from the BTS equipment to the
\nBase Station Controller (BSC ) through the
\nOutdoor units and antennas.  Each
\ncommunication link consists of one set
\ncomprising of two numbers radio terminal
\n(IDU, ODU) and antennas at both ends.”
\n\tIn order to have inter-connectivity Radio terminals
\nare a must.  The technical literature produced indicates that
\nthe radio terminal and antennas as ancillary equipment.  It
\n“aids and attends” to discharge the functions it is meant to
\ndischarge.  The authority in original as well as the
\nCommissioner (Appeals) have held that radio terminals are
\npart of BTS therefore they are not eligible for exemption.
\nUpholding the said view would amount to reading ‘ BTS
\ncomponents’ in the notification instead of ‘BTS ancillary
\nequipment’ which  is not permissible under law.\n<\/p>\n
The technical literature  submitted makes it clear that
\nthe radio terminals transport the already converted digital
\nspeech from BTS equipment to the BSC (Base Station Control)
\nthrough the outdoor units and antennas.  It demonstrates that
\nthese radio terminals are solely and principally used with the
\nBTS and therefore they rightly qualify as BTS ancillary
\nequipments to be eligible to the benefit of Notification No.
\n11\/97 dated 1.3.1997 as amended by Notification No. 51\/97
\ndated 2.6.1997.  Radio terminal is not independent equipment
\nhaving its own independent function.  It cannot be termed as a
\ngeneral purpose radio equipment as the technical literature
\nclearly indicates that this is specially designed to support
\nMobile Communication Network in particular GSM. The
\nliterature  makes it abundantly clear that the radio terminal is
\nnot a stand alone equipment and cannot function at all, on its
\nown, as contended by the Department.  Revenue in its appeal
\nhas admitted that the radio terminal functions as a radio wave
\ntransmitter between BTS\/BSC\/MSC.  Without this function
\nBTS\/BSC\/MSC will be rendered useless as there will be no
\nconnectivity.\n<\/p>\n
Revenue has relied upon the subsequent Notification No.
\n21\/2002 dated 1.3.2002.  The subsequent notification defines
\nthe scope of ancillary equipment for BTS by restricting the
\nentry to only three equipments, namely, i) Cellular repeaters,\n<\/p>\n
ii) Amplifiers and iii) Waves Guides (List 22 S. No. 239 of the
\nTable).  Radio terminals  in this notification have not been
\nconsidered as ancillary equipment of BTS.  Revenue contends
\nthat Notification No. 21\/2002 is  clarificatory in nature and
\nwould be applicable to the radio terminals imported by the
\nrespondent in the year 1998 as well.  We do not find any
\nsubstance in this submission.  The subsequent notification
\nwhich defines the scope of ancillary equipment is effective only
\nfrom 1.3.2002 and does not have retrospective effect.
\nRespondent’s clearance pertains to July, 1998 and the
\nNotification No. 21\/2002 has come into effect with effect from
\n1.3.2002.  It would not apply to the goods which have already
\nbeen cleared.  Notification No. 21\/2002 cannot be given
\nretrospective effect.  In the absence of any express provision
\ncontained in the  notification ordinarily it cannot be presumed
\nthat the same is retrospective in nature.  Learned counsel for
\nthe Revenue has failed to show that the subsequent
\nnotification is clarificatory in nature.  Incidentally, it may be
\nmentioned  that with regard to the identical goods imported
\nthrough Delhi, wherein the items were classified under the
\nsame heading, Delhi Customs House extended the benefit of
\nthe said notifications to the respondent.\n<\/p>\n
Tribunal in its order after referring to the literature to
\nwhich we have also made the reference came to the
\nconclusion:\n<\/p>\n
“From the above it is very clear that
\nwithout the Radio Terminals there cannot
\nbe any interconnectivity between BTS and
\nBTS or BSC or MSC. In view of this the
\nRadio Terminals definitely qualify to be
\nancillary equipments for BTS. On going
\nthrough the technical literature it is seen
\nthat without the Radio Terminal there
\ncannot be any interconnectivity at all and
\nthe Cellular Telephony System would not
\nwork. Hence, we hold that the imported
\nitems namely, Radio Terminals should be
\nconsidered as BTS ancillary equipments
\nand given the benefit of the above-\n<\/p>\n
mentioned notification”.\n<\/p>\n
 We do not find any infirmity at the finding arrived by the
\nTribunal.  The said finding is approved.\n<\/p>\n
For the reasons stated above, we do not find any merit in
\nthe appeal and dismissed the same leaving the parties to bear
\ntheir own costs.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Supreme Court of India Commissioner Of Customs, … vs M\/S Spice Telecom, Bangalore on 19 October, 2006 Author: Bhan Bench: Ashok Bhan, Altamas Kabir, Dalveeer Bhandari CASE NO.: Appeal (civil) 1695 of 2006 PETITIONER: Commissioner of Customs, Bangalore RESPONDENT: M\/s Spice Telecom, Bangalore DATE OF JUDGMENT: 19\/10\/2006 BENCH: Ashok Bhan, Altamas Kabir & Dalveeer Bhandari […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_lmt_disableupdate":"","_lmt_disable":"","_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[30],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-125856","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-supreme-court-of-india"],"yoast_head":"\nCommissioner Of Customs, ... vs M\/S Spice Telecom, Bangalore on 19 October, 2006 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/commissioner-of-customs-vs-ms-spice-telecom-bangalore-on-19-october-2006\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Commissioner Of Customs, ... vs M\/S Spice Telecom, Bangalore on 19 October, 2006 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/commissioner-of-customs-vs-ms-spice-telecom-bangalore-on-19-october-2006\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2006-10-18T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2018-05-09T18:24:02+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:creator\" content=\"@legaliadmin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:site\" content=\"@Legal_india\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"9 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/commissioner-of-customs-vs-ms-spice-telecom-bangalore-on-19-october-2006#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/commissioner-of-customs-vs-ms-spice-telecom-bangalore-on-19-october-2006\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Commissioner Of Customs, … vs M\\\/S Spice Telecom, Bangalore on 19 October, 2006\",\"datePublished\":\"2006-10-18T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-05-09T18:24:02+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/commissioner-of-customs-vs-ms-spice-telecom-bangalore-on-19-october-2006\"},\"wordCount\":1878,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"Supreme Court of India\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/commissioner-of-customs-vs-ms-spice-telecom-bangalore-on-19-october-2006#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/commissioner-of-customs-vs-ms-spice-telecom-bangalore-on-19-october-2006\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/commissioner-of-customs-vs-ms-spice-telecom-bangalore-on-19-october-2006\",\"name\":\"Commissioner Of Customs, ... vs M\\\/S Spice Telecom, Bangalore on 19 October, 2006 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2006-10-18T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-05-09T18:24:02+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/commissioner-of-customs-vs-ms-spice-telecom-bangalore-on-19-october-2006#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/commissioner-of-customs-vs-ms-spice-telecom-bangalore-on-19-october-2006\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/commissioner-of-customs-vs-ms-spice-telecom-bangalore-on-19-october-2006#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Commissioner Of Customs, … vs M\\\/S Spice Telecom, Bangalore on 19 October, 2006\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"name\":\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"description\":\"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.\",\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"alternateName\":\"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Organization\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\",\"name\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"alternateName\":\"Legal India\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"logo\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"width\":512,\"height\":512,\"caption\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.facebook.com\\\/LegalindiaCom\\\/\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/Legal_india\"]},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\",\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Legal India Admin\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/legaliadmin\"],\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/author\\\/legal-india-admin\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Commissioner Of Customs, ... vs M\/S Spice Telecom, Bangalore on 19 October, 2006 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/commissioner-of-customs-vs-ms-spice-telecom-bangalore-on-19-october-2006","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Commissioner Of Customs, ... vs M\/S Spice Telecom, Bangalore on 19 October, 2006 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/commissioner-of-customs-vs-ms-spice-telecom-bangalore-on-19-october-2006","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2006-10-18T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2018-05-09T18:24:02+00:00","og_image":[{"width":512,"height":512,"url":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Legal India Admin","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_creator":"@legaliadmin","twitter_site":"@Legal_india","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Legal India Admin","Est. reading time":"9 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/commissioner-of-customs-vs-ms-spice-telecom-bangalore-on-19-october-2006#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/commissioner-of-customs-vs-ms-spice-telecom-bangalore-on-19-october-2006"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Commissioner Of Customs, … vs M\/S Spice Telecom, Bangalore on 19 October, 2006","datePublished":"2006-10-18T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2018-05-09T18:24:02+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/commissioner-of-customs-vs-ms-spice-telecom-bangalore-on-19-october-2006"},"wordCount":1878,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["Supreme Court of India"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/commissioner-of-customs-vs-ms-spice-telecom-bangalore-on-19-october-2006#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/commissioner-of-customs-vs-ms-spice-telecom-bangalore-on-19-october-2006","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/commissioner-of-customs-vs-ms-spice-telecom-bangalore-on-19-october-2006","name":"Commissioner Of Customs, ... vs M\/S Spice Telecom, Bangalore on 19 October, 2006 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2006-10-18T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2018-05-09T18:24:02+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/commissioner-of-customs-vs-ms-spice-telecom-bangalore-on-19-october-2006#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/commissioner-of-customs-vs-ms-spice-telecom-bangalore-on-19-october-2006"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/commissioner-of-customs-vs-ms-spice-telecom-bangalore-on-19-october-2006#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Commissioner Of Customs, … vs M\/S Spice Telecom, Bangalore on 19 October, 2006"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","description":"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.","publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"alternateName":"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Organization","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization","name":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","alternateName":"Legal India","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","width":512,"height":512,"caption":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","https:\/\/x.com\/Legal_india"]},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea","name":"Legal India Admin","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Legal India Admin"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com","https:\/\/x.com\/legaliadmin"],"url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/author\/legal-india-admin"}]}},"modified_by":null,"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_likes_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/125856","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=125856"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/125856\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=125856"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=125856"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=125856"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}