TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2011 (1) TMI 1313
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....N.T.) issued under Section 7(a) of the Customs Act, 1962. As such, the appellants were of the bona fide belief that the impugned goods can be imported through Tuticorin Port. Moreover, the said goods were also not on the restricted list of items under the EXIM Policy. Only after import, the appellants came to know that Rule 43A of the Drugs and Cosmetics Rules, 1945 does not list Tuticorin Port as one of the ports through which drugs can be imported. He argues that the violation of the said restriction under the Drugs and Cosmetics Rules was totally unintentional, this has happened, for the first time in case of the appellants and that the appellants have since shifted their imports to Chennai port. He further submits that the impugned good....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....he department states that the Customs Notification permitting import of all goods through a Port is a general one but specific provisions under other laws are required to be enforced. He further points out that as recorded in paragraph 6 of the impugned Order-in-Original, the Drugs Control authorities had opined that the impugned goods may be released with an instruction not to use the material until receipt of 'No Objection Certificate' from the DGCl, while recommending for one time exemption from Port restriction under Rule 43A of the Drugs and Cosmetics Rules, 1945. 4. I have considered the submissions from both sides. In the case of Baccorose Perfumes (supra), the Tribunal dealt with a case where the proposal was to deal with the ....