Tribunal overturns confiscation of goods, orders release based on lack of import restrictions

The Tribunal set aside the impugned order, directing the release of the goods upon clearance from JDGFT, Madurai, within six weeks. The Tribunal found that the import of Barium Nitrate was not prohibited or restricted under the Exim Policy or any law, and that the confiscation was unjustified as the appellants had informed the JDGFT about the import. Consequently, the confiscation and penalty imposed under the Customs Act were overturned, and the goods were ordered to be released to the importer.

---

---

Issues involved: Import of hazardous chemical without proper notification to authorities, confiscation under Customs Act, penalty imposition, compliance with Hazardous Chemical Rules, appeal against confiscation and penalty.

In the present case, M/s. Natarja Trading Company imported a consignment of "Barium Nitrate" powder without providing necessary details to the concerned authorities as required by Rule 18(2) of The Manufacture, Storage and Import of Hazardous Chemicals Rules, 1989 (MS & IHCR). The original authority imposed a penalty of Rs. 50,000/- under Section 112(a) of the Customs Act, 1962, and sustained the confiscation under Section 111(d) of the Act due to the hazardous nature of the chemical, without offering the option for redemption under Section 125 of the Act.

The appellants contended that they had informed the jurisdictional JDGFT as per the Rules before the order was passed, and challenged the absolute confiscation of the consignment. They argued that the failure to provide necessary details should have been treated as a curable lapse instead of resulting in confiscation. They also claimed that import of Barium Nitrate was "Free" under the policy, supported by submission of Bills of Entry.

The lower authorities justified the confiscation and penalty u/s 11 of the Customs Act, 1962, stating that the import was prohibited. However, upon careful consideration, the Tribunal found that import of Barium Nitrate was neither prohibited nor restricted under the relevant Exim Policy or any other law. The Tribunal also noted that the MS & IHCR did not prohibit the import of Barium Nitrate. As the appellants had informed the JDGFT about the import, the confiscation was deemed inappropriate. The Tribunal directed the release of the goods to the importer upon submission of necessary clearance from the JDGFT, Madurai, within six weeks from the date of the order.

Therefore, the Tribunal set aside the impugned order, ordered the release of the goods upon clearance from JDGFT, Madurai, and directed the Commissioner to ensure timely release within six weeks from the date of the order.

---