9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2024 (5) TMI 1282 - AT - CustomsSeizure of imported waste paper consignments - confiscation - Penalty - Prohibited wastes found imported in contravention of import policy as well as the provisions of Hazardous Waste Management Rules including Office Memorandum dated 11.05.2010 - HELD THAT - After going through the decision of this Tribunal in the case of Emami Paper Mills Limited 1852687 , we are agree with this decision and in the interest of justice, we are of the view that principles of natural justice is required to be followed by us for strong contest raised by the Appellant on the issue of challenge for the Examination Report. In view of this, we pass the following Order - Coming to the option of joint re-examination afresh, as given above, if the appellant chooses to opt for re-examination, the decision of the Tribunal would be as under - (A) In case the re-examination results in a different conclusion by the examining authority holding that there is no violation of statutory provision of Pollution and Hazardous materials in the imported consignment, the confiscation ordered in the impugned Order-in-Appeal, would be treated as set aside. (B) If the re-examination result confirms the earlier conclusion arrived at by the Revenue, in such a case, the appellant would be required to re-export the offending prohibited goods. (C) The appellant would be bound by the final decision of the re-examining authority as already held. The Appeals are disposed in the above terms.
Issues Involved:
1. Seizure of imported waste paper consignments. 2. Issuance of Show Cause Notices (SCNs) and proposed penalties. 3. Adjudication by the Joint Commissioner of Customs. 4. Appeal before the Commissioner of Customs (Appeals). 5. Reliance on previous Tribunal decisions. 6. Tribunal's final decision and directions. Summary: 1. Seizure of Imported Waste Paper Consignments: The appellant, engaged in manufacturing coated Duplex Board, imported waste paper from a foreign buyer. Upon examination, the consignments were found to contain contaminants like solid municipal waste, bio-medical waste, and hazardous waste, violating the import policy and HWM Rules. Consequently, the consignments were seized u/s 110 of the Customs Act. 2. Issuance of Show Cause Notices (SCNs) and Proposed Penalties: Two SCNs were issued proposing confiscation of the consignments and penalties u/s 112 (a) & (b) and 114AA of the Customs Act. It was also proposed to re-export the goods as per Rule 15 (2) of the Hazardous Waste Management Rules. The SCNs were based on the contravention of import policy and HWM Rules. 3. Adjudication by the Joint Commissioner of Customs: The Joint Commissioner of Customs confirmed the demands in the SCNs, citing guidelines from the Office Memorandum and HWM Rules. The adjudication emphasized that waste paper imports should be free from prohibited wastes and that the consignments fell within the scope of 'illegal traffic' under Rule 15 of HWM Rules. 4. Appeal before the Commissioner of Customs (Appeals): The appellant challenged the Orders-in-Original before the Commissioner of Customs (Appeals), who affirmed the orders and rejected the appellant's appeal. 5. Reliance on Previous Tribunal Decisions: The appellant relied on the decision in Neelkanth Pulp and Paper Boards V. C.C. Jamnagar, while the respondent cited M/s. Emami Paper Mills Limited Vs. Commr. of Customs (Port), Kolkata. The Tribunal decided to follow the Division Bench's order in the Emami Paper Mills case. 6. Tribunal's Final Decision and Directions: The Tribunal, agreeing with the Emami Paper Mills decision, directed a joint re-examination of the goods by the department and SPCB. The appellant was given the option to opt for re-examination. If the re-examination found no violation, the confiscation would be set aside. If the violation was confirmed, the appellant would need to re-export the goods or face the consequences as per the previous orders. The appellant would be bound by the final decision of the re-examining authority. The appeals were disposed of in these terms, with the operative part of the order pronounced in open court.
|
