2008 (7) TMI 626

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....sification, import is permitted by actual users against a licence from a country which is a party to the "Montreal Protocol on substances that deplete the ozone layer. No import licence has been produced by M/s. Kandla Ship Suppliers. The item Arcton 22 gas (chemically known as HCFC 22) was added to the Montreal Protocol by the Copenhagen Amendment of Nov. 92. United Arab Emirates has not ratified the Copenhagen Amendment and as far as the HCFC 22 is concerned, UAE is to be treated as a 'State not party to the Protocol'. As such, import of HCFC 22 from UAE to India is prohibited. Further, Rule 28 of Gas Cylinder Rules, 1981 prescribe licence for importation of any cylinder filled or intended to be filled with any compressed gas. M/s. Kandla....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....hich amounts to export only and therefore imposition of redemption fine for re-export was not warranted. He also states that penalty on the manager, who happens to be husband of the proprietor, was not warranted since the penalty has already been imposed on the proprietor. Learned DR supports the adjudication order. 4. I have considered the points raised by the learned advocate. As regards UAE being a party to Protocol, Commissioner has observed that UAE is to be treated as a 'State not party to Protocol' as far HCFC 22 is concerned and apparently he has considered the issue raised by the Appellants before him about UAE being a party. I find that there is no dispute that the licence was required if the number of cylinders at a time ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....s redemption fine imposed and also penalty upon the appellants. While considering the quantum of penalty, it has to be taken note of that Commissioner has observed that Shri Rajiv Lakhanpal had come to the adverse notice when he was running the business in the name and style of Kandla Ship Suppliers and his licence to operate as ship chandlier had been cancelled. Apparently, this has been taken into account while arriving at quantum of penalty by the Commissioner. Now, he is working as manager and his wife is the proprietor of the firm. As regards points that no bill of entry was filed by the appellant and therefore no penalty can be imposed, I am unable to agree with this view. This is because there is no dispute that the appellant had imp....