2010 (7) TMI 463 - HC - Customs

Confiscation prohibitions on import - Revenue wants the recommendation for confiscation of the goods made by the competent authority should be enforced - Tribunal held that recommendation not the governing factor to decide whether the particular goods were liable to be confiscated or not - provision of the Import Export Policy Learned Tribunal found that there was no restriction of the import export of the goods, and as per Import Export Policy goods are classified were not restricted or prohibited goods Commissioner also taken same view - Decided in favor of assessee.

Summary

Issues involved:
1. Interpretation of import policy regarding wild animals and their products.
2. Consideration of the definition of Wild Animal under the Wild Life (Protection) Act, 1972.
3. Application of Section 111(d) of The Customs Act, 1962 in confiscation of goods.
4. Analysis of import and export policy restrictions under the Customs Act, 1962.
5. Determination of prohibited goods under the Foreign Trade Policy.

Analysis:
1. The first issue raised in the judgment questions the Tribunal's dismissal of the appeal without considering the prohibition on the import of wild animals and their products under the Foreign Trade (Import Policy). The appellants argued that the Tribunal erred in law by not taking this prohibition into account.

2. The second issue revolves around the definition of Wild Animal as per the Wild Life (Protection) Act, 1972. The appellants contended that the sea shells imported were products of animals specified in Schedule I and IV of the Act, making them prohibited for import. The Tribunal's failure to consider this definition was challenged.

3. The third issue concerns the Tribunal's reliance on the recommendation of wildlife authorities for confiscation. The appellants argued that Section 111(d) of The Customs Act, 1962 makes goods imported contrary to any prohibition liable for confiscation, irrespective of recommendations.

4. The fourth issue addresses the Tribunal's decision regarding import restrictions under the Import Export Policy and the Customs Act, 1962. The appellants claimed that the sea shells imported were prohibited goods under these provisions, contrary to the Tribunal's findings.

5. The final issue questions whether the sea shells imported were prohibited under the Foreign Trade Policy, specifically under Chapter-3 Exim Code 307. The appellants argued that the species of sea shells fell under Schedule I and IV of the Wild Life (Protection) Act, 1972, making their import prohibited.

In the judgment, the Court found no substantial question of law involved in the matter. The Tribunal's decision was upheld based on the classification of the goods under the Customs Tariff and the absence of import restrictions in the Import Export Policy. The Court emphasized that the absence of restrictions in the policy meant there was no basis for confiscation, regardless of recommendations from competent authorities. The Commissioner also supported this view on confiscation. Consequently, the appeal was dismissed, and no costs were awarded.