2025 (2) TMI 1022 - HC - Customs

Confiscation of imported consignments - hazardous material in the imported consignments - waiver of penalties under the Customs Act 1962 - disregarding evidence submitted by the importer regarding the contents of the consignments - HELD THAT - The question of re-examination of a cargo would arise when there is material to discredit the initial examination. On a reading of the order-in-original it is prima facie found that the description of the goods stuffed in the 67 (54 13) containers did not conform to the pre-shipment certificate. On a perusal of the order-in-original of the show-cause notice and the order-in-original it is found that the examination had been conducted on several containers and it has been found that the containers contained waste material which have been referred to as municipal waste that they are hazardous waste and the same is not permissible to be imported. The Court was convinced in the case of Emami Paper 2024 (5) TMI 1261 - CESTAT KOLKATA that substantial questions of law arose for consideration and therefore the appeal was admitted. The necessity to grant an interim order did not arise in the said case since the importer agreed to comply with the order passed by the first Appellate authority who directed destruction of the goods. The option is given to the respondent-importer that if they are willing to re-export the imported cargo which have been held to be prohibited goods in terms of the direction issued by the adjudicating authority they will give their consent in writing to the Department and if the same is given subject to compliance of other formalities the Department shall permit the respondent/importer to re-export the goods at their risk and cost without reference to the pendency of this appeal. The learned Advocate for the appellant shall file requisite number of informal paper books prepared out of Court within four weeks including therein all papers and documents used before the trial Court upon serving copies thereto the learned Advocate for the respondent. Settlement of index and all other formalities are dispensed with. Conclusion - The Court admitted the appeals based on substantial questions of law raised by the revenue. List the appeal for hearing after six weeks - The stay application stands disposed of.

Summary

The issues presented and considered in the judgment are as follows:1. Whether the Customs, Excise, Service Tax Appellate Tribunal erred in directing re-examination of containers and setting aside a confiscation order.2. Whether the Tribunal erred in setting aside penalties under the Customs Act, 1962.3. Whether the Tribunal erred in disregarding evidence submitted by the importer regarding the contents of the consignments.4. Whether the Tribunal erred in applying certain environmental regulations to the case.5. Whether the goods were mis-declared and imported in contravention of import policies and waste management rules.The Court found that the Tribunal did not examine the facts of the case but relied on a previous decision. The Tribunal directed re-examination of containers and set conditions for the importer to re-export prohibited goods if necessary. The Court noted discrepancies in the description of goods and the actual contents of the containers, which led to confiscation and penalties under the Customs Act.The Court emphasized the need for independent examination of the case and considered the substantial questions of law raised by the revenue. It stayed the Tribunal's order pending further appeal and directed the importer to comply with re-export requirements if they choose to do so. The Court also allowed the filing of additional documents and scheduled the appeal for a hearing after six weeks.The significant holdings include:- The Court admitted the appeals based on substantial questions of law raised by the revenue.- The Tribunal's order was stayed pending further appeal.- The importer was given the option to re-export prohibited goods at their own risk and cost.In conclusion, the Court addressed key legal issues related to customs regulations, penalties, evidence submission, and environmental compliance in the context of importation of goods. The judgment focused on ensuring a fair examination of the case and upholding legal principles in customs enforcement.