2011 (3) TMI 102

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....try dt. 9.2.2010 & 2.3.2010. The examination of the cargo revealed that the containers were stuffed with paper waste, along with municipal solid waste comprising of broken toys, used diapers, used sanitary napkins, empty perfume bottles, broken bottles, used battery cells, used undergarments, thermocol, used aluminum foils, packing materials, used leather shoe base, broken CD with cover and used latex white and coloured surgical gloves etc. In both the cases, consignments have arrived with pre-inspection certificates from an agency authorized by DGFT authorities. The consignment was examined by the officers of Tamil Nadu Pollution Control Board who opined that it contained solid waste including infectious substances like, used surgical glov....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....the case of Norasia Container Lines Ltd. & Others, the High Court did not interfere with the order passed by the customs authorities in allowing re-export without payment of fine and penalty and therefore similar treatment should be meted out to them. He emphasized that the imports of the two consignments were accompanied with pre-inspection certificates from authorized agency. The respondents were not aware of the shipment of goods other than what was declared in the documents by the suppliers. They have incurred expenses including demurrages in connection with re-export. The Additional Commissioner, as an adjudicating authority, has also clearly held that the import has taken place contrary to the instructions/purchase order placed by the....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ITC Ltd. (supra) relied upon by SDR which upheld the confiscation is relevant to the facts of the present case.   7. Having held that the goods are liable for confiscation, the next issue to be considered is whether the importer is liable for penalty. It is not disputed that the consignments from two different countries have been received along with pre-inspection certificates from authorized agencies. It is also not in dispute that the respondents have declared the description based on their purchase order, Bill of Lading and invoices of the suppliers. Their knowledge about the consignment containing the goods different from what was declared appears to be only after the goods were examined by the customs in their presence. There i....