2008 (3) TMI 585 - AT - Customs

Summary

Issues:
1. Confiscation of imported goods - Polyurethane Resin.
2. Imposition of redemption fine and penalty.
3. Violation of Rule 18(2) of the Management, Storage and Import of Hazardous Chemicals Rules, 1989.

Analysis:

The appeal was filed against the confiscation of imported goods, specifically Polyurethane Resin, and the imposition of redemption fine and penalty. The central issue revolved around determining whether the imported goods fell under the category of hazardous chemicals listed in Part II of Schedule I of the Hazardous Chemicals Rules, 1989, and if the appellant breached Rule 18(2) of the said Rules.

It was contended that the composition of the imported goods included Polyurethane Resin, Ethyl Acetate, and Isopropyl Alcohol, with the latter two being listed in Schedule I of the Hazardous Chemicals Rules, 1989. The appellants were alleged to have failed to comply with Rule 18(2) of the Rules in this regard.

Upon examination of the relevant provisions, it was noted that Rule 18(2) mandated the provision of information regarding imported hazardous chemicals within a specified timeframe. The definition of hazardous chemicals under Rule 2(e) encompassed chemicals meeting specific criteria outlined in the Schedules. Importantly, it was emphasized that the listing of the imported chemical in the Schedule was crucial, irrespective of its composition.

Furthermore, it was argued that Polyurethane Resin served as a binder in the ink manufacturing process and was not among the imported solvents listed in the Rules. Consequently, the imported chemical, Polyurethane Resin, not being listed in the Schedule, was deemed non-hazardous under the Rules. The absence of a provision considering the chemical composition for classification was highlighted.

In light of the above analysis, it was concluded that since the imported chemical was not listed in the Schedule of hazardous chemicals, the confiscation of the goods was deemed unjustified. Consequently, the impugned order was set aside, and the appeal was allowed, entitling the appellant to consequential relief. The judgment was duly dictated and pronounced in open court.