TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
When case Id is present, search is done only for this
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>Tribunal overturns order, grants appeals, and offers relief under Foreign Trade Policy and Hazardous Waste Rules.</h1> <h3>M/s. Gagan Impex Versus C.C.E Patparganj New Delhi</h3> M/s. Gagan Impex Versus C.C.E Patparganj New Delhi - 2017 (347) E.L.T. 524 (Tri. - Del.) Issues:1. Interpretation of Foreign Trade Policy regarding import of refurbished goods.2. Requirement of special import authorization from DGFT for restricted goods.3. Confiscation of goods under Customs Act and imposition of penalty.4. Compliance with Hazardous Waste Rules for import of specific goods.Analysis:Issue 1: Interpretation of Foreign Trade Policy regarding import of refurbished goodsThe appellant imported refurbished data graphic display tubes under a specific tariff heading, attracting certain duties. The goods were examined by Custom Officers and a Chartered Engineer, who certified the goods as refurbished with a residual life of more than 80% of new tubes. The appellant failed to produce specific import authorization from DGFT, leading to enhancement of the value as per Chartered Engineer's opinion. The appellant argued that the goods fell under the category of refurbished spares of capital goods, allowed for import under the Foreign Trade Policy. However, the adjudicating authority rejected the appeal, stating that the goods were similar to television picture tubes and required prior permission due to hazardous waste categorization.Issue 2: Requirement of special import authorization from DGFT for restricted goodsThe adjudicating authority held that the import of second-hand personal computers/laptops, including refurbished spares, fell under restricted category, necessitating special import authorization from DGFT. Due to non-compliance, the goods were confiscated under section 111(d) of the Customs Act and released on payment of redemption fine, with a penalty imposed under Section 112(a)(i) of the Act. The appellant contended that the Chartered Engineer's certification and compliance with residual life conditions should suffice, but the authority upheld the confiscation.Issue 3: Confiscation of goods under Customs Act and imposition of penaltyThe appellant challenged the impugned order on the grounds of policy interpretation and compliance with conditions for import of refurbished goods. Despite presenting arguments based on the Foreign Trade Policy provisions, the authority maintained that the goods did not meet the criteria for import as refurbished spares of capital goods, leading to the rejection of the appeal. The appellant's assertions regarding the specific nature of the goods and the Chartered Engineer's certification were not considered sufficient to overturn the confiscation and penalty imposed.Issue 4: Compliance with Hazardous Waste Rules for import of specific goodsThe appellant highlighted compliance with Hazardous Waste Rules by obtaining permission from the Ministry of Environment and Forest for the import of goods falling under the waste electrical or electronic assembly category. The circular issued by the Central Board of Excise and Customs supported the import of such goods with the requisite permission, which was duly obtained by the appellant. This compliance was crucial in challenging the reasoning behind the confiscation and justifying the import of the goods.In conclusion, the Tribunal set aside the impugned order, allowing all appeals and providing consequential relief to the appellant based on the interpretation of the Foreign Trade Policy provisions, compliance with residual life conditions, and obtaining necessary permissions as per Hazardous Waste Rules.
TaxTMI 