https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=758467 Imported solvent-based paints declared as stock lot could not be treated as hazardous waste under Basel No. A4070 of Schedule III Part A of the Hazardous and Other Wastes (Management and Transboundary Movement) Rules, 2016 on the basis of warning labels alone. The record lacked chemical testing, sample analysis, or other reliable material to show that the consignments were waste arising from production, formulation, or use of paints, and there was no demonstrated analysis accompanying the shipment as required by the Rules. An adverse opinion based only on visual inspection and records, without opening the containers or scientific examination, was insufficient. The refusal to allow cross-examination of the CPCB scientist further undermined the proceedings. Confiscation, re-export, redemption fine, and penalty were therefore unsustainable. en-us Wed, 11 Sep 2024 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 14 Sep 2024 08:24:37 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=758467 Imported solvent-based paints declared as stock lot could not be treated as hazardous waste under Basel No. A4070 of Schedule III Part A of the Hazardous and Other Wastes (Management and Transboundary Movement) Rules, 2016 on the basis of warning labels alone. The record lacked chemical testing, sample analysis, or other reliable material to show that the consignments were waste arising from production, formulation, or use of paints, and there was no demonstrated analysis accompanying the shipment as required by the Rules. An adverse opinion based only on visual inspection and records, without opening the containers or scientific examination, was insufficient. The refusal to allow cross-examination of the CPCB scientist further undermined the proceedings. Confiscation, re-export, redemption fine, and penalty were therefore unsustainable. Case-Laws Customs Wed, 11 Sep 2024 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=758467