9911796707
TMI Blog2011 (3) TMI 533X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nd scrap. It also appears that an amended LOP dated 27-7-2009 was issued permitting import of waste and scrap and used plastic articles. The respondents imported 4 container loads of goods and filed Bill of Entry dated 21-7-2009 declaring the consignment as Pet bottles, mixed HDPE, LDPE, PP, PVC scrap. The consignment was got examined by officials of Tamilnadu Pollution Control Board who vide their report dated 28-8-2009 recommended re-export of the consignment on the ground that the respondents were not having permission to carry out washing processes in their premises at Tuticorin. The original authority vide order dated 26-11-2009 held that the goods imported by them were prohibited goods and, therefore, liable for confiscation. Accordin ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... terms of 6.2 of Foreign Trade Policy, there is further relaxation in respect of 100% EOU. He adds that as 100% EOU they are entitled to import restricted items as well for use in the manufacture of export goods. Therefore, the conclusion reached by the original authority that what was imported was prohibited goods is wrong. While he admits that they were not having washing facility in the Tuticorin unit, they had an arrangement with a unit in Gujarat by name Renaissance Corporation Ltd. for the purpose of undertaking the washing operations. The said unit has been granted necessary permission by Gujarat Pollution Control Board. The Assistant Commissioner, Central Excise, Tuticorin, who is the jurisdictional officer in-charge of the 100% EOU ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ditions so as ensure environmental protection. The advice of Pollution Control Board for re-export apparently was based on the appreciation of fact that the respondent did not have washing facility at their Tuticorin unit. There is no evidence on record which indicated that the Tamilnadu State Pollution Control Board were made aware of the arrangement for getting the work of washing done through another unit in Gujarat who was having facility as well as necessary clearance from the Gujarat Pollution Control Board. In the reply to the notice, the respondents have clearly brought out the arrangement for undertaking washing operations through the jobber in Gujarat and though the same have been noted by the original authority, he has chosen to ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
