9911796707
|
Home
Issues Involved:
1. Whether hypodermic syringes imported by the appellants were allowed for import against Serial No. 48(b) of List 6 of Appendix 6, Import-Export Policy, 1985-88. 2. Whether the import of hypodermic syringes required a valid import license under Serial No. 521 of Appendix 3, Part A of Import-Export Policy, 1985-88. 3. The applicability of the Central Board of Excise and Customs' clarification allowing the clearance of pending consignments of disposable syringes under OGL. Issue 1: Import Eligibility under Serial No. 48(b) of List 6 of Appendix 6 The appellants contended that the hypodermic syringes should be covered under OGL entry for dental equipment as per Serial No. 48(b) of List 6, Appendix 6. They argued that these syringes are used for dental purposes, specifically for injecting anesthesia. However, the Tribunal noted that no evidence was provided to show that these syringes were marketed as dental syringes. The Tribunal emphasized that statutory entries must be interpreted to avoid redundancy and to fulfill the purpose of the Import & Export Policy. The Tribunal concluded that the syringes in question were not specialized dental syringes and thus did not qualify for import under the OGL entry. Issue 2: Requirement of Import License under Serial No. 521 of Appendix 3, Part A The Tribunal examined whether the hypodermic syringes fell under the restricted category requiring an ITC license as per Serial No. 521 of Appendix 3, Part A. It was determined that hypodermic syringes, which are of general use and not specifically designed for dental applications, are restricted and require a valid import license. The Tribunal noted that the appellants did not provide product literature or other evidence to prove that the syringes were designed primarily for dental use. Consequently, the import of these syringes without a valid license was deemed a violation of the policy. Issue 3: Clarification by Central Board of Excise and Customs The appellants referred to a clarification from the Central Board of Excise and Customs, dated 2 December 1987, which allowed the clearance of pending consignments of disposable syringes under OGL. The Tribunal acknowledged the Board's communication but noted that the clarification did not explicitly state that all disposable syringes were covered under OGL. The Tribunal held that the clarification was not sufficient to override the specific policy requirements, especially since the syringes were not proven to be designed for dental use. Separate Judgments: - Majority View (Technical Member and Third Member): The majority upheld the order of confiscation and rejected the appellants' plea for reduction in the quantum of redemption fine and penalty. They emphasized that the appellants had repeated the same offense despite prior penalties and that no new evidence justified a reduction in fines. - Dissenting View (Judicial Member): The Judicial Member proposed remanding the issue for reconsideration by the adjudicating authority. He highlighted the inconsistency in the Customs House's treatment of similar imports and the need for even-handedness in administrative decisions. He cited the principle of contemporanea expositio and relevant case law to support the need for a fresh examination of the issue. Final Order: The appeal was disposed of in light of the majority view, upholding the order of confiscation and rejecting the plea for reduction in fines and penalties. The syringes were deemed not covered under OGL and required a valid import license, which the appellants did not possess.
|
