Prohibited import of used ventilators under hazardous-waste rules, with redemption fine and penalty falling away on re-export

Used ventilators imported as second-hand critical care medical equipment were treated as falling within Basel entry B1110 in Schedule VI of the Hazardous and Other Wastes (Management, Handling and Transboundary Movement) Rules, 2016, so their import was regarded as prohibited under Rule 12(6). The text also states that once confiscation is set aside to permit re-export, the consequential redemption fine and penalty under the Customs Act, 1962 do not survive, because redemption under Section 125 is only an option and cannot be compelled. The resulting position is that the goods were not permitted to be imported, but the connected monetary and penal consequences were removed to enable re-export.

---

---

Issues: (i) Whether used ventilators imported as second-hand critical care medical equipment were covered by Schedule VI of the Hazardous and Other Wastes (Management, Handling and Transboundary Movement) Rules, 2016 and consequently prohibited for import under Rule 12(6); (ii) whether, once confiscation was set aside, redemption fine and penalty under the Customs Act, 1962 could survive and whether re-export could be directed.

Issue (i): Whether used ventilators imported as second-hand critical care medical equipment were covered by Schedule VI of the Hazardous and Other Wastes (Management, Handling and Transboundary Movement) Rules, 2016 and consequently prohibited for import under Rule 12(6).

Analysis: The imported goods were declared as used ventilators. Ventilators were treated as critical care medical equipment, and the definition of reuse included original use. On that basis, the goods fell within Basel entry B1110 in Schedule VI. The reasoning accepted that the goods were covered by the prohibition in Rule 12(6). The decision relied on the nature of the goods and the schedule entry, and distinguished the cited precedent on the basis that it concerned a different class of goods.

Conclusion: The goods were covered by Schedule VI and their import was not permitted.

Issue (ii): Whether, once confiscation was set aside, redemption fine and penalty under the Customs Act, 1962 could survive and whether re-export could be directed.

Analysis: The order noted that redemption under Section 125 of the Customs Act, 1962 is only an option and cannot be compelled. Since confiscation was set aside to facilitate re-export, the basis for redemption fine and penalty also disappeared. The order therefore removed the consequential monetary and penal consequences while allowing the goods to be re-exported.

Conclusion: Confiscation, redemption fine and penalty were set aside, and re-export was directed.

Final Conclusion: The appeal succeeded only in part: the import was held impermissible, but the confiscation and connected monetary/penal consequences were set aside to enable re-export of the goods.

Ratio Decidendi: Where imported goods fall within a prohibited schedule entry under the hazardous-waste regime, import is impermissible; however, if confiscation is set aside to permit re-export, consequential redemption fine and penalty cannot stand, and redemption under the Customs Act remains an option rather than a compulsion.

---