TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>Importing chemicals without required certificate; court interprets Regulations, refrains from legal issues pending criminal proceedings.</h1> The case involved a company importing Methyl Ethyl Ketone (MEK) without a No Objection Certificate (NOC) as required under the Narcotic Drugs and ... Seizure of goods - Goods imported without proper NOC - Held that:- on 17.1.2014, after the seizure was made, the officer who had seized the controlled substance in question submitted a report to his superior officer, as required under Section 57 of the NDPS Act. On 18.1.2014, after receipt of the report of the seizing officer, the Assistant Narcotics Commissioner (Prevention) Gwalior appended on the said report a note to the effect that Crime Case No.1/2014 is registered in the Headquarter Office, Gwalior and the Seizing Officer was authorized to investigate the matter and file a complaint before the Competent Court, after completion of investigation, if required. Thereafter it appears, an investigation was carried out and on 14.8.2014 a complaint under Section 36A(1)(d) of the NDPS Act was filed before the Special Judge (NDPS Act cases), Ali Baug, District Raigad, Maharashtra for alleged violation of Sections 25A and 38 of the NDPS Act by one Basant Kalra, Managing Director of the First petitioner Company for importing the controlled substance in question without obtaining the NOC required under the Regulations in force. - it would be appropriate for us to refrain from addressing any of the issues raised by and on behalf of the rival parties and instead leave the petitioners with the remedy of taking such appropriate steps in the criminal proceeding, including release of the goods pending trial, as it may be advised Issues:1. Import of controlled substance without No Objection Certificate (NOC) under Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances (Regulation of Controlled Substances) Order, 2013.2. Interpretation of Clause 11 of the Regulations regarding import of controlled substances.3. Seizure of goods and subsequent criminal proceedings under Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985.4. Validity of rejection of NOC application and implications of criminal proceedings on legal issues raised.Analysis:1. The case involved a company importing Methyl Ethyl Ketone (MEK) without a No Objection Certificate (NOC) as required under the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances (Regulation of Controlled Substances) Order, 2013. The company applied for NOC but imported the goods before receiving it, leading to seizure and criminal proceedings.2. The interpretation of Clause 11 of the Regulations was central to the case. The petitioners argued that the absence of a refusal to grant NOC within 21 days should be deemed as approval. They also highlighted the authorities' delay in taking coercive action despite the goods landing in India before NOC was granted.3. The seizure of goods and subsequent criminal proceedings under the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 raised questions about the legality of the actions taken. The court noted the FIR lodged and the ongoing trial, emphasizing the interconnectedness of the issues raised in both civil and criminal proceedings.4. The rejection of the NOC application and its timing concerning the seizure of goods were scrutinized. The court refrained from addressing the legal issues raised, considering the pending criminal proceedings and the need for the petitioners to address the matters within that context, including seeking appropriate relief in the ongoing trial.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
