TMI Blog2022 (12) TMI 321X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... confiscation of the goods under section 111 (d) and 111 (m) must be upheld as there was not only misdeclaration of the goods but the import itself was in violation of the prohibition under the Rules. Since import of the disputed good was prohibited, the Adjudicating Authority had the discretion to either allow redemption or not. In our considered view, the Adjudicating Authority has correctly exercised its discretion not to allow redemption of hazardous waste to the appellant and the Commissioner (Appeals) has, in the impugned order, correctly upheld it. Section 112 (a) of the Customs Act provides for penalty for acts or omissions which render goods liable to confiscation under Section 111. The amount of penalty imposed is Rs. 1,00,0 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... and the operative part is as follows :- (i) I confiscate the waste oil falling under Chapter sub-heading No. 27109900, weighing 78.200 MT and valued at Rs. 10,98,772/- imported by M/s Ayyan Energy Resources Pvt. Ltd., Jaipur vide Bill of Entry No. 950 dated 11.06.2010, under Section 111 (d) and 111 (m) of the Customs Act, 1962 ; (ii) I impose a penalty of Rs. 1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lakh only) on M/s Ayyan Energy Resources Pvt. Ltd., Jaipur under Section 112 (a) of the Customs Act, 1962 ; (iii) I also impose penalty of Rs. 1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lakh only) on Shaikh Mohd. Khalil, Director of M/s Ayyan Energy Resources Pvt. Ltd., Jaipur under Section 114AA of the Customs Act, 1962 3. On appeal, the Commissioner (Appeals) passed ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the case are not in dispute. The appellant imported oil which, on testing, turned out to be waste oil, which was hazardous substance listed in Schedule VI of the Rules. It is also not in dispute that Rule 13 (4) of these Rules prohibited import of hazardous waste and that the appellant had no licence to import or process it under the Rules. The appellant s prayer to release it to someone else who had a licence to process waste oil or permit it to be re-exported cannot be accepted for the reason that the oil already stands confiscated and on confiscation, the property vests in the Central Government as per Section 126. The appellant cannot export the good to which it does not even have a title as they had been confiscated. He further submits ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e owner of the goods or, where such owner is not known, the person from whose possession or custody such goods have been seized,] an option to pay in lieu of confiscation such fine as the said officer thinks fit: ********* 11. Since import of the disputed good was prohibited, the Adjudicating Authority had the discretion to either allow redemption or not. In our considered view, the Adjudicating Authority has correctly exercised its discretion not to allow redemption of hazardous waste to the appellant and the Commissioner (Appeals) has, in the impugned order, correctly upheld it. 12. The appellant s request to re-export the goods also cannot accepted because, having been confiscated the imported goods vest with the Central Gove ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
