9911796707
|
Home
Issues involved:
1. Import of Zinc Ash under OGL. Analysis: The appeal filed by M/s. Prabhat Fertilizer & Chemical Works questioned whether Zinc Ash imported by them could have been imported under Open General License (OGL). The Appellant's representative argued that they manufacture Zinc Sulphate from Zinc obtained from Zinc Ash, which contains a high percentage of total Zinc. They had been importing Zinc Waste without issues since 1989 and had necessary clearances from the State Pollution Control Board. The Commissioner had confiscated three consignments of Zinc Ash, claiming it to be hazardous waste, and imposed fines. However, the Appellants had successfully imported Zinc Ash previously under different circumstances. The Appellant's advocate also cited a committee report stating that Zinc Ash should not be classified as hazardous waste based on water extract analysis. In response, the Respondent's representative argued that if Zinc Ash was not hazardous waste, there would be no need for Pollution Control Board clearance. The Commissioner justified the confiscation based on the import without a license, as hazardous waste falls under restricted import lists. However, the Commissioner allowed redemption of previously confiscated Zinc due to the Appellant's compliance with Hazardous Waste Rules. After considering both sides' arguments, the Tribunal found that the issue revolved around the import of Zinc Ash under specific bill entries. The Commissioner did not provide reasons for treating Zinc Ash as hazardous waste in the impugned order. In a previous case, the Appellants had successfully imported non-hazardous Zinc Ash based on test reports and compliance with conditions. The Tribunal noted that since August 1995, Zinc Ash had been cleared without an import license but subject to specific conditions, which the Appellants had met. With no evidence presented by the Revenue to prove the hazardous nature of Zinc Ash, the appeal was allowed in favor of the Appellants.
|
