TMI Blog1993 (7) TMI 93X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... mit clearance on the ground that the goods imported were Diethylene Diamine Hexahydrate of Pharmacopoeia grade and which were canalised items as per import policy. The show cause notice was issued to the petitioners as to why the two consignments should not be confiscated and penalty imposed. In answer to the show cause notice, the petitioners claimed that the imported goods were neither banned items nor canalised items and the goods were not a drug but drug intermediate used for manufacture of Diethylene Anhydrous or Hexahydrate. 2. The Additional Collector of Customs, Bombay by order dated August 17, 1983 held that the goods imported were canalised items and therefore was not permissible to be imported as OGL. The Additional Collector d ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... harucha submitted that during the pendency of the appeals before the Tribunal, a further report was sought for from the Chief Chemist and after receipt of the report, the Tribunal proceeded to record the finding against the petitioners by making out a new case. There is considerable merit in the submission urged by the learned counsel. As regards the report of the Deputy Chief Chemist, the Tribunal observed that in the absence of analytical data, no reliance can be placed on the test report of the Deputy Chief Chemist. The Tribunal therefore held that the order passed by the Deputy Collector on the basis of report by Deputy Chief Chemist cannot be sustained. The Tribunal further held that the certificate issued by the Assistant Drug Control ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t recording any finding as to the nature of the goods imported, but we are setting aside the order on a short ground that the Tribunal made out a new case without any notice to the petitioners. The consignments are already cleared by the petitioners by interim order and only thing now required is to set aside the order of the Tribunal providing for confiscation of goods and imposing fine of Rs. 1,50,000/- as redemption fine. 5. Accordingly, petition is allowed and the impugned order dated August 21, 1984 passed by the Tribunal and order dated August 17, 1983 passed by the Additional Collector of Customs, Bombay are set aside. The redemption fine paid by the petitioners shall be refunded forthwith. In the circumstances of the case, there w ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
