2018 (6) TMI 819 - AT - Customs

EOU/STP/EHTP scheme - import of Lead Acid Batteries - non-production of registration certification issued by the Ministry of Environment and Forest, Govt. of India to permit clearances - Held that - Only a person who imports lead acid batteries for the purpose of sale is required to furnish a certificate as provided under section 5 - The appellant has obtained certificate and intimated the department by filing a copy of the same. The appellant being the actual user and the lead batteries have been imported not for the purpose of sale, the condition of filing the registration certificate, though not applicable in toto, has been substantially complied by them. The confiscation as well as penalty imposed is unwarranted and require to be set aside - appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant.

Summary

Issues:
1. Violation of Batteries (Management & Handling) Rules, 2001 leading to confiscation of goods, redemption fine, and penalty.
2. Interpretation of the definition of "importer" under the Rules.
3. Compliance with the requirement of a registration certificate for lead acid batteries import.

Analysis:
1. The case involved the appellants importing lead acid batteries under a specific scheme but failing to possess the required registration certificate as mandated by the Batteries (Management & Handling) Rules, 2001. Due to this non-compliance, the goods were provisionally released under bond with a directive to produce the certificate within six months. However, the certificate was not provided, leading the department to allege a violation of the Rules and order for confiscation of goods, along with imposing a redemption fine and penalty. The Commissioner (Appeals) upheld this decision, prompting the appellants to appeal to the Tribunal.

2. The appellant's argument centered on the interpretation of the term "importer" as defined in the Rules, which refers to a person importing lead acid batteries for the purpose of sale. The appellant claimed they were merely consumers of the batteries, not falling within the definition of an importer as they did not import for sale. They highlighted that as per the Rules, only an importer is required to furnish a registration certificate. Despite the delay in obtaining the certificate, the appellant eventually acquired it and informed the department. Citing relevant case laws, the appellant contended that since they produced the certificate later, the demand should be set aside.

3. The Tribunal analyzed the definitions and provisions of the Batteries (Management & Handling) Rules, 2001, particularly focusing on the definitions of "consumer" and "importer." It noted that an importer, as per the Rules, is someone who imports lead acid batteries for the purpose of sale and is required to furnish a registration certificate. In this case, the appellant, being the actual user of the batteries and not importing for sale, had substantially complied with the registration certificate requirement by obtaining and submitting it to the department. Relying on the arguments presented and the precedents cited, the Tribunal concluded that the confiscation and penalties imposed were unwarranted. Consequently, the impugned order was set aside, and the appeal was allowed with any necessary consequential relief.

This detailed analysis of the judgment highlights the issues surrounding the violation of the Batteries (Management & Handling) Rules, the interpretation of the term "importer," and the compliance with the registration certificate requirement, ultimately leading to the Tribunal's decision to set aside the confiscation and penalties imposed.