2015 (6) TMI 1114 - HC - Customs

Testing of imported toys - M/s. Indian Institute of Technology, one of the agency, has declined to test the imported goods stating that it does not have the requisite technology to carry out the tests - the goods were tested by Central Revenue Control Laboratory and a report has been submitted - In view of the report submitted by Central Revenue Control Laboratory, this Court directs that it is open to the respondent department to proceed further and pass orders in accordance with law within two weeks from the date of this order - petition disposed off.

Summary

Issues:
1. Testing of imported goods by specified agencies.
2. Decline of one agency to conduct tests.
3. Extension of time for testing and submission of reports.
4. Submission of test reports by Central Revenue Control Laboratory.
5. Further proceedings by the respondent department.

Analysis:
1. The High Court initially directed the respondent to have the imported toys tested by either M/s. Indian Institute of Technology or the Central Revenue Control Laboratory based on a statement made by the Customs Department. Subsequently, it was discovered that the Indian Institute of Technology declined to test the goods due to a lack of technology, leading to a subsequent order by the Court for testing by the Central Revenue Control Laboratory.

2. Following the second order, an extension of time was granted for testing the toys, with a deadline set for submission of test reports. The respondent sought and was granted an extension until a specified date for the submission of the reports.

3. The Court was informed that the goods were tested by the Central Revenue Control Laboratory, and a report was submitted. An affidavit was filed by the Deputy Commissioner of Customs, Chennai-V Commissionerate, stating that most items met the required standards except for two, which were deemed fit for import upon payment of applicable duty.

4. After perusing the affidavit and documents submitted by the respondent department, the Court directed the department to proceed further and pass orders within two weeks based on the report from the Central Revenue Control Laboratory.

5. Consequently, the miscellaneous petition was disposed of with the provided clarification and direction for the respondent department to take further action within the specified timeframe in accordance with the law.