9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2015 (10) TMI 415 - AT - CustomsRequest for provisional release of goods - whether the goods imported by the appellant i.e. Rubber Processing Oil, (RPO), are hazardous or non-hazardous - Held that - The report of CRCL was challenged in Writ Petition and their Lordships had directed the petitioner and U.O.I. to give the report of laboratories in Maharashtra who are capable would analyze the RPO. On such directions, list was given by Ministry of Environment and Forests and sample was tested in Ashwamedh Engineers & Consultants, Nashik. Reliance is placed on this report by the Ld. Counsel, to strongly submit that the goods imported by them i.e. RPO are not hazardous, while CRCL Director, goes on record that testing method adopted was erroneous. In order to get correct analytical report of the RPO, we deem it necessary that the samples be re-drawn and forwarded to any of the approved laboratory in Maharashtra as were informed to Hon ble High Court.
Issues involved: Provisional release of imported goods, determination of hazardous nature of Rubber Processing Oil (RPO), analysis reports by different laboratories, directions from High Court, selection of laboratory for sample analysis.
Analysis: 1. Provisional Release of Imported Goods: The appellant filed applications for the provisional release of goods imported, which were considered on multiple dates. The issue was previously dealt with by the Hon'ble Bombay High Court in a writ petition where the petitioners were allowed to withdraw the petitions with liberty to prosecute pending matters before the Appellate Tribunal. The High Court directed reliance on the Test Report for the pending matters. 2. Nature of Imported Goods - Hazardous or Non-Hazardous: The main issue revolves around determining whether the imported Rubber Processing Oil (RPO) is hazardous or non-hazardous. The Revenue relies on the analysis report of CRCL, while the assessee relies on the report by Ashwamedh Engineers & Consultants CSL. The High Court directed the testing of samples in laboratories in Maharashtra capable of analyzing RPO. The report from Ashwamedh Engineers & Consultants, Nashik, is being relied upon by the appellant to argue that the RPO is not hazardous. The CRCL Director, however, claims that the testing method was erroneous. 3. Selection of Laboratory for Analysis: Both parties agreed that the samples should be re-drawn and forwarded to an approved laboratory in Maharashtra for correct analysis. It was mutually decided that M/s. Ultra Tech Environmental Consultancy and Laboratory in Mumbai or M/s. Aavanira Biotech Pvt. Ltd. in Pune would be suitable for analyzing the samples. If the former declines, the sample will be sent to the latter. The Tribunal accepted this suggestion and directed the sample to be drawn in the presence of both parties. 4. Timely Analysis and Further Proceedings: Considering the prolonged nature of the matter, the Tribunal emphasized that the sample analysis should be prioritized and completed within 10 days. The analysis should be conducted in accordance with the Hazardous Waste Rules of 2008. Both sides were given liberty to mention the matter before the regular Bench once the analysis report is received, with the applicants bearing the cost of analysis. 5. Conclusion: The Tribunal's order for the provisional release of the goods imported by the appellant is contingent upon the analysis of the RPO samples to determine their hazardous nature. The selection of an approved laboratory in Maharashtra for analysis is crucial, and the timely completion of the analysis is emphasized to expedite the proceedings.
|
