ATUL AUTOMATIONS PVT LTD Vs. COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioners are concerned with the import of Multi-Functional Devices (printing and copying machines) [for brevity "MFDs"], which, on import, have been detained by the respondents. It is alleged by the petitioners, that they were directed to re-export the goods to the country from which the import was made.

(2.) The learned Senior Counsel has specifically referred to Exhibit P12 notification, G.S.R.395(E) dated 04.04.2016, published by the Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change [for brevity "MoEF&CC"]; which is the Hazardous and Other Wastes [Management and Transboundary Movement] Rules, 2016. Though MFDs were earlier freely importable, later on, they were made a restricted commodity as per the EXIM Policy. In fact, there was a dispute as to whether MFDs would come within the category of "hazardous waste", which, according to the petitioners, was decided in their favour by Exhibit P6 judgment of the High Court of Judicature at Madras and the same has also been incorporated under Exhibit P12, the Hazardous and Other Wastes (Management and Transboundary Movement) Rules, 2016, specifically Rule 13(2).

(3.) Rule 13(2) refers to the "other wastes" as scheduled in Part D of Schedule III, for which there is no requirement of permission from the MoEF&CC; but, however, requires furnishing of information as per Form 6 to the Customs authorities, accompanied with the documents stated in clauses (a) to (c) of sub-rule (2) of Rule 13 and also those listed in Schedule VIII. The MFDs admittedly have been included in Part D as applicable in the Rules and the requirement under Schedule VIII is as herein below: <FRM>JUDGEMENT_176_LAWS(KER)1_2017_1.html</FRM> <FRM>JUDGEMENT_176_LAWS(KER)1_2017_2.html</FRM>