<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>Imported rubber process oil labeled hazardous waste after flawed CRCL test; re-export u/r 17 allowed, confiscation/penalties set aside</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=95195</link>
    <description>CRCL&#039;s test report treating the imported rubber process oil as hazardous waste was held unreliable because CRCL lacked recognized accreditation and even indicated absence of requisite research facilities; the department ought to have tested the goods through a recognized laboratory, hence the hazardous characterization could not be sustained, resulting in setting aside of absolute confiscation. Since the show cause notice itself proposed re-export under Rule 17 of the Hazardous Waste Rules, 2008, and the importer was willing to re-export, denial of that option and ordering absolute confiscation was unjustified; re-export was directed on an undertaking that the same goods would not be re-imported. Redemption fine and penalty were also set aside. - CESTAT</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 19 Dec 2025 08:30:26 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 19 Dec 2025 08:30:27 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=872735" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>Imported rubber process oil labeled hazardous waste after flawed CRCL test; re-export u/r 17 allowed, confiscation/penalties set aside</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=95195</link>
      <description>CRCL&#039;s test report treating the imported rubber process oil as hazardous waste was held unreliable because CRCL lacked recognized accreditation and even indicated absence of requisite research facilities; the department ought to have tested the goods through a recognized laboratory, hence the hazardous characterization could not be sustained, resulting in setting aside of absolute confiscation. Since the show cause notice itself proposed re-export under Rule 17 of the Hazardous Waste Rules, 2008, and the importer was willing to re-export, denial of that option and ordering absolute confiscation was unjustified; re-export was directed on an undertaking that the same goods would not be re-imported. Redemption fine and penalty were also set aside. - CESTAT</description>
      <category>Highlights</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 19 Dec 2025 08:30:26 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=95195</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>