1999 (11) TMI 452 - AT - Customs

Summary

Issues:
1. Confiscation of Zinc Ash for contravention of Customs Act.
2. Alleged tampering with the date of Bill of Lading.
3. Import of goods without a valid license.
4. Classification of Zinc Ash as hazardous waste.
5. Application of Import Policy and relevant regulations.

Confiscation of Zinc Ash:
The appeal was filed against the Order-in-Appeal directing the confiscation of 40 Metric Tonnes of Zinc Ash imported by the appellants under Section 111(m) of the Customs Act. The Commissioner of Customs had imposed a fine of Rs. 2 lakhs and a penalty of Rs. 25,000 on the appellants. The Customs officials alleged that the goods became restricted category items due to an amendment to the Import Policy, and the appellants should have obtained a valid import license.

Tampering with Bill of Lading:
The Customs officials contended that the date of Bill of Lading had been altered from 4-4-1996 to 24-3-1996, raising suspicions of tampering. However, the Lower Authority could not establish that the appellants were responsible for the tampering, leading to uncertainties regarding this issue.

Import without Valid License:
The Additional Commissioner held that the import of goods on board on 24-3-1996 was without a valid license due to an amendment in the Import Policy effective from 25-3-1996. The appellants argued that the import was within the terms of the revised policy as shipments were made within 45 days of the policy change, but this contention was rejected.

Classification as Hazardous Waste:
The Commissioner of Customs upheld the classification of Zinc Ash as hazardous waste, leading to confiscation and imposition of fines. However, the Chemical Examiner's report stated that the Zinc Ash did not contain any water-soluble chemical compounds, contradicting the hazardous waste classification.

Application of Import Policy:
The appellants cited the EXIM Policy and a letter from the D.G.F.T. to support their case, emphasizing that they had entered into a firm contract before the policy change and the shipment was within the specified time limit. They argued that the goods were not hazardous waste as per the Chemical Examiner's report, challenging the decision to confiscate and penalize them.

In conclusion, the Tribunal allowed the appeal, setting aside the impugned order based on the lack of water-soluble chemical compounds in the Zinc Ash, which contradicted the classification as hazardous waste. The appellants were entitled to consequential benefits as per the law.