9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (4) TMI 445X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... lligence that this drug is a prohibited drug in terms of Govt of India's Notification No GSR 82(E) dated 10.02.2011 which prohibited manufacture, sale and distribution of Cisapride Monohydrate BP and it's formulations for human use. After conducting investigations, a show-cause notice dated 21.03.2012 was issued by the DRI to the appellant for exporting this drug vide 22 shipping bills in violation of the aforesaid notification issued by Ministry of Health and Family Welfare under the Drugs and Cosmetics Act. It was alleged that since the export took place in violation of the prohibition, the drug which was exported was liable to confiscation under Section 113(d) of the Customs Act 1962. It was further alleged that since the drug has alread ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... entral Drugs Standard Control Organisation has clarified as follows" "It is pertinent to point out here that the Gazette Notification No 82(E) dated 10.02.2011 for banning of drugs prohibits the manufacturing, sale and distribution of the drugs within the country but it is not applicable for drugs banned exported outside country for which the under-signed has been notified by the Office Order dated 29.08.2011. This office has already issued a number of export NOCs for the following manufacturers within A.P. with effect from 01.10.2011. Earlier to this, Export NOC permissions for banned drugs for manufacturing and export were issued by our DCG(I) at New Delhi for last so many years. This is for your kind information". 3. The above letter ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ods was not fulfilled, the Customs Officers could have not given the Let Export Order and could have asked them to get the necessary certificates. The only mistake which they committed is exporting the drug without first obtaining the NOC which was also not noticed by the Customs Officers. It was, therefore, an inadvertent error on their part as well as on the part of the officers who processed their exports. Therefore the entire impugned order needs to be set aside. 5. Learned A.R. reiterates the order-in-original. 6. We have considered the arguments of both sides and perused the records. The allegation in the show-cause notice is that the export of the drug in question was prohibited and 22 consignments of this drug were exported in vi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s proceseds through Risk Management System. In other words, whether there are imports or exports, all documents are required to be checked in all cases by the officer giving 'Let Export Order' in case of exports or 'out of charge' in case of imports. It was wrong on the part of the appellant to export the drug without obtaining NOC. It was equally wrong on behalf of the Customs Officer to have cleared the export consignment without the NOC. It does not appear from the show-cause notice that the customs officers have been put to notice for clearing the consignment without NOCs or that any action has been taken against them. We do not find that the lapse of the appellant in not obtaining an NOC before exporting the drug requires confiscation ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
