9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (11) TMI 734X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... mported without required no objection certificate from Food Safety & Standards Authority of India (FSSAI). The consignment was put under 100% examination by the officers of the DRI. During course of examination of the consignment, it was observed by the officers in their examination report that the MRP/RSP and other details regarding importer, their addresses etc. as required under Rule 6 and Rule 10 of Legal Metrology (Packaged Commodity) Rules, 2011 have not been complied with as the required details have not been given on the packets of dietary supplements. The officers have also drawn representative samples from the consignment and same have been got chemically tested from the FSSAI Laboratory, Ghaziabad. The FSSAI Laboratory vide their ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 2A have also been invoked against the importing firm and its Proprietor Shri Anand Kadiyan, against Shri Rajesh Maikhuri, Director of the CHA firm M/s R.U. Imports-Exports Pvt. Ltd., against M/s R.U. Imports- Exports Pvt. Ltd., Shri Rajinder Madhok (Consultant) and Shri Ved Prakash Dhembula, Superintendent of Customs, ICD, Tughlakabad and Shri Ranjeet Singh Rana, Inspector, Customs, ICD, Tughlakabad. The matter got adjudicated vide order-in-original No. 18/2007 dated 29 September 2017 whereunder it has been held as under :- "(i) seized goods (seizure value Rs. 2,17,97,466/-) are liable for confiscation under Section 111 (d) as they are prohibited goods and are absolutely confiscated under Section 125 of the Customs Act, 1962 ; (ii) pe ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... and, therefore, the Adjudicating Authority has erred in not imposing penalty under Section 112A on the CHA firm namely M/s R.U. Imports-Exports Pvt. Ltd. 4. The learned Departmental Representative has mentioned that from the investigation it is very apparent that the Director of the CHA firm Shri Rajesh Maikhuri was fully aware that the subject consignment required NOC from FSSAI and still ignoring the statutory requirements of FSSA, 2006, the goods were cleared without necessary test report. He is also responsible of filing blank GATT declaration forms with only signature of the importing firm. From the investigation it has categorically emerged that previous consignment of Dietary supplements were also cleared without compliance of FSSA ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ious persons including the Director of the CHA firm reveals that the Director of the CHA firm was aware that the present import consignment as well as the consignment, which have been cleared previously were not meeting with the legal requirement of the FSS Act, 2006 and thereby the same had been imported and cleared in violation of the provision of the Customs Act, 1962. We also find that the Adjudicating Authority under para 28.3 of the order-in-original has categorically mentioned that the CHA firm is responsible for filing the documents for clearance of goods from the customs and the firm has failed to ensure compliance of the provisions of Food Safety & Standards Act, 2006 as well as the provision of the Customs Act, 1962, still the Ad ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
