Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

Home Case Index All Cases Customs Customs + AT Customs - 2013 (9) TMI AT This

  • Login
  • Cases Cited
  • Summary

Forgot password       New User/ Regiser

⇒ Register to get Live Demo



 

2013 (9) TMI 318 - AT - Customs


Issues Involved:
1. Classification of imported secondhand computers and photocopiers as hazardous waste.
2. Requirement of specific import license for restricted items.
3. Validity of confiscation orders and penalties imposed.
4. Conditions for redemption and re-export of goods.

Issue-wise Detailed Analysis:

1. Classification of Imported Secondhand Computers and Photocopiers as Hazardous Waste:
In all four appeals, the Directorate of Revenue Intelligence (DRI) intercepted consignments of secondhand computers and photocopiers, suspecting them to be hazardous electronic waste. Chartered Engineers examined the goods and certified them as e-waste. The original authority, based on these reports, classified the goods as hazardous waste under the Hazardous Wastes (Management, Handling and Transboundary Movement) Rules, 2008, and ordered their confiscation with a condition for redemption and re-export. However, the Commissioner (Appeals) held that the goods were not hazardous waste, referencing the Tribunal's decision in the case of Shivam International & others Vs. CC, Chennai, which stated that only what is categorized and certified as hazardous waste by a competent authority can be treated as such. The appellate authority concluded that there was no basis to consider e-waste necessarily as hazardous waste, and thus, re-export was not warranted.

2. Requirement of Specific Import License for Restricted Items:
The Tribunal noted that the subject goods being restricted items required a specific import license, which the respondents did not possess. Consequently, the goods were liable to be confiscated under Section 111(e) of the Customs Act. The original authority rightly ordered the confiscation of the goods with an option for redemption against payment of a fine.

3. Validity of Confiscation Orders and Penalties Imposed:
The original authority imposed penalties under Sections 112(a) and 114AA of the Customs Act. The Commissioner (Appeals) upheld the confiscation but allowed the goods to be released for home consumption on payment of appropriate duty and redemption fine. The penalties imposed were also sustained. The Tribunal affirmed the appellate authority's view, dismissing the first three appeals (M/s. Divine International Ltd., M/s. Deccan Enterprises, and M/s. Asian Copiers) and sustaining the penalties imposed.

4. Conditions for Redemption and Re-export of Goods:
The original orders required the goods to be re-exported upon redemption. However, the Commissioner (Appeals) and the Tribunal found no legal basis for mandatory re-export, allowing the goods to be cleared for home consumption upon payment of duty and fines. In the case of M/s. Ace Digital Systems, the Tribunal set aside the appellate order and aligned it with the other three cases, allowing home consumption clearance upon payment of fine and duty, and sustaining the penalty.

Conclusion:
The Tribunal upheld the confiscation orders with an option for redemption and payment of fines, but allowed the goods to be cleared for home consumption, rejecting the mandatory re-export condition. The penalties imposed by the original authority were sustained across all cases. The Tribunal's decision was consistent with the precedent set in the Shivam International case, emphasizing that only certified hazardous waste can be treated as such under the relevant rules.

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates