2013 (8) TMI 67 - AT - Customs

Import of Hazardous Waste e-waste - Datagraphic Display Tubes which are used in computer monitors. - confiscation of goods - Appellant challenged the notice issued for confiscation of the goods imported u/s 111(d) and for imposition of penalty - Department was of the view that the goods were e-waste whose import was restricted under Import Export Policy 2009-14 r.w Board s Circular No. 27/2011- Held that - The goods had been imported without permission from the MOEF the import would have to be treated contrary to the restrictions - it would be liable for confiscation u/s 111(d) - goods imported were electronic assemblies for direct re-use - they would be covered by Serial No. 1110 of Part B of the Schedule-III to the Hazardous Waste Rules, 2008 they would require prior permissible from MOEF - no permission of the Ministry of Environment and Forests (MOEF) had been obtained for import for the purpose of re-use the same would be liable for confiscation - appeal decided against assessee.

Summary

Issues:
1. Whether the imported goods are considered e-waste or Hazardous Waste.
2. Whether the goods were restricted for import at the time of entry.
3. Validity of the confiscation and penalties imposed.

Issue 1:
The appellant imported Datagraphic Display Tubes, which were later found to be old and used/reconditioned goods. A Chartered Engineer's report confirmed the condition of the goods, indicating signs of wear and reconditioning. The Department argued that the goods fell under the category of e-waste, restricted for import under specified regulations. The Show Cause Notice led to confiscation and penalties, citing Hazardous Waste rules. The Commissioner (Appeals) upheld the confiscation but reduced the fines. The appellant challenged this decision.

Issue 2:
The dispute centered on whether the imported goods were restricted for import at the time. The Department relied on Circulars and Hazardous Waste Rules, claiming the goods required permission from the Ministry of Environment and Forests (MOEF) for import due to their nature. The appellant contended that the goods were old and used capital goods, not falling under restricted categories. The judgment analyzed relevant rules and regulations to determine the import status of the goods.

Issue 3:
The judgment delved into the definitions and rules surrounding Hazardous Waste, emphasizing the need for MOEF permission for certain imports. The judgment referenced specific rules under Hazardous Waste (Management, Handling, and Transboundary Movement) Rules, 2008, to establish the legality of the import. It concluded that the goods in question fell under a category requiring MOEF permission, which was not obtained, leading to the decision of confiscation and re-export at the importer's cost. The judgment dismissed the appeal, upholding the initial decision.

This detailed analysis of the judgment highlights the key issues surrounding the import of Datagraphic Display Tubes, the classification of goods as e-waste, the import restrictions at the time, and the legal implications leading to the confiscation and penalties imposed.