9911796707
|
Home
Issues:
1. Waiver of pre-deposit and stay of recovery in respect of penalty amount. 2. Early disposal of the appeal. 3. Confiscation of Black-coloured Rayon Flock under Customs Act. 4. Imposition of penalty on the importer. 5. Awareness of hazardous dye content by the importer. 6. Reduction of penalty amount. 7. Re-export of hazardous goods. Issue 1: Waiver of pre-deposit and stay of recovery in respect of penalty amount The Tribunal had before it two applications - one for waiver of pre-deposit and stay of recovery concerning the penalty amount, and the other for early disposal of the appeal. After reviewing the records and hearing both sides, the Tribunal decided that the appeal needed final disposal at that stage. Consequently, both applications were allowed, and the Tribunal proceeded to address the appeal. Issue 2: Confiscation of Black-coloured Rayon Flock under Customs Act The case involved the importation of Maroon-coloured and Black-coloured Rayon Flock. The Customs authorities, after testing samples, found hazardous dye content exceeding limits in the Black-coloured Rayon Flock. As a result, the original authority allowed clearance of the Maroon-coloured item but ordered confiscation of the Black-coloured Rayon Flock under Section 111(d) & (m) of the Customs Act. Additionally, a penalty of Rs. 4 lakhs was imposed on the importer under Section 112(a) of the Act. The appeal was against the reduced penalty of Rs. 50,000. Issue 3: Awareness of hazardous dye content by the importer The appellants claimed they were unaware of the hazardous dye content in the Black-coloured goods they imported. However, the Tribunal held that the importer should have been aware of the provisions of the Environment (Prevention) Act, 1986, regarding hazardous dyes in imported fabrics. The Tribunal found the importer negligent in ensuring compliance with the Act, leading to the penalty imposition. Issue 4: Reduction of penalty amount The Tribunal acknowledged the importer's willingness to re-export the hazardous goods and deemed the penalty of Rs. 50,000 too severe. Consequently, the penalty was reduced to Rs. 10,000 based on the circumstances of the case and the importer's readiness to rectify the situation by re-exporting the goods. Issue 5: Re-export of hazardous goods The appellants had initially requested to re-export the hazardous goods, which was allowed by the adjudicating authority and upheld by the Commissioner (Appeals). However, in the present appeal, there was no mention of re-export. The Tribunal left this matter to the original authority, directing them to permit re-export upon the fulfillment of all legal requirements by the appellants. The impugned order was modified accordingly, and the appeal was disposed of affirming the reduced penalty and allowing for the re-export of the hazardous goods.
|
