Tribunal overturns Customs decision on Zinc Chloride AA Batteries, emphasizes need for conclusive proof

The Tribunal set aside the Customs department's decision to hold imported Zinc Chloride Heavy Duty AA Batteries as prohibited goods due to insufficient evidence confirming compliance with IS-9128 specifications. The Tribunal also overturned the presumption of Chinese origin based on website information, emphasizing the need for conclusive proof such as official documents and certificates. The case underscores the significance of accurate verification and documentation in determining the nature and origin of imported goods to prevent unjust confiscations and penalties.

---

---

Issues:
1. Nature of the battery - whether the batteries imported are as per IS-9128 specifications.
2. Country of origin - whether the goods were manufactured in China or Malaysia.

Nature of the Battery Issue:
The appellant imported Zinc Chloride Heavy Duty AA Battery, and a special investigation raised concerns about misdeclaration. Representative samples were sent for testing to verify compliance with IS-9128 specifications. The Customs department sought advice from BIS, but no confirmation was obtained. The adjudicating authority held the batteries as prohibited goods, demanding re-export and imposing fines. The appellant contested, arguing that without BIS confirmation, it cannot be conclusively determined if the batteries met IS-9128 standards. The Tribunal agreed, setting aside the order due to insufficient evidence.

Country of Origin Issue:
Regarding the country of origin, the manufacturer was identified as a Chinese company, but the goods were imported from Malaysia with "Made in Malaysia" stamps. The department presumed Chinese origin based on a website, but the High Commission's reply did not confirm this. The appellant argued that there was no conclusive evidence to confiscate the goods. The Tribunal found the reliance on the internet insufficient, emphasizing that documents and certificates indicated Malaysian origin. The order was set aside, directing a fresh review by the adjudicating authority to consider the discrepancies and issue a new decision.

This judgment highlights the importance of conclusive evidence in determining the nature of imported goods and their origin, emphasizing the need for proper verification and documentation to avoid erroneous confiscations and penalties.

---