Document Fragment View
Fragment Information
Showing contexts for: CFTRI in M/S.Unik Traders vs The Commissioner Of Customs on 23 April, 2012Matching Fragments
2.3. Pursuant to the sales confirmation, the supplier raised three Invoices in No.VML-11082-11 dated 04.04.2011 for 138 Mts VMIN 11012 dated 18.04.2011, for 184 Mts and VMIN 11034 dated 24.05.2011, for 184 Mts on the petitioner. Along with the said Invoices, the supplier dispatched the Packing List, Certificate of Origin, Certificate of Analysis and Bills of Lading. These import documents collectively are Annexure-C series.
2.4. The first consignment of goods in 5520 Bags arrived at Tuticorin Seaport in the 3rd week of May, 2011 and the petitioner entity filed Bill of Entry No.3618504 dated 26.05.2011, on first check basis for clearance of the goods. Examination order was issued by the Proper Officer of Customs, which is Annexure-D. However, it transpires that the Directorate of Revenue Intelligence, Tuticorin caused an Investigation into the import of the said consignment and issued summons dated 13.06.2011, to the deponent to give evidence and produce documents in respect of the import. The said summons is Annexure-E. The petitioner entity therefore submitted Certification of the supplier and the manufacturer to the said agency causing the investigation. The petitioner entity therefore submitted Certification of the supplier and the manufacturer to the said agency caused the investigation. The said certifications and communications collectively are Annexure-F. Statement was also recorded from the deponent's son, who appeared in person in compliance with the summons above referred. The petitioner thereafter filed two Bills of Entry in Nos.4324694 dated 10.08.2011 and 4376254 dated 17.08.2011, for clearance of the balance of the consignment, which had arrived in 14720 bags weighing 368 MTS totally. The said Bills of Entry are collectively Annexures G & H. 2.5. It is transpired that samples from each of the consignments were drawn and sent to various testing agencies at Tuticorin, Palayamkottai and Food Safety and Standards Authority of India, New Delhi, Central Revenue Control Laboratory at New Delhi, which all confirmed that the samples were indeed Monosodium Glutamate, a Food Additive, classifiable under Customs Tariff Heading 2922 4220. The petitioner therefore caused a communication by Fax and Registered Post on 14.09.2011, 20.09.2011, 23.09.2011, 28.09.2011, 30.09.2011 to the respondents for clearance at release of the subject goods covered under the aforesaid Bills of Entry. The said communications collectively are Annexure-I. 2.6. Vide communication dated 30.09.2011, the Office of the respondent informed the petitioner that the Bills of Entry in respect of the subject goods have been taken up for investigation by the Office of the Directorate of Revenue Intelligence, Tuticorin, who are yet to return the same and that the Bills of Entry will be assessed after receipt of the same from the Investigation Agency, which is Annexure-J. However, the Investigation Agency, Directorate of Revenue Intelligence, Tuticorin under communication dated 04.10.2011 informed that the goods imported is a Food Additive of Chinese origin and the packings did not have the name and address of the manufacturer and Importer, which violated Rule 32(c) of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Rules, 1955 (in short 'Rules) and therefore, prohibited for imports under Section 5 of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954 (in short 'Act'). Therefore, the consignment covered under the aforesaid Bills of Entry were seized under Mahazar dated 01.08.2011 and 02.08.2011 and the Report and documents were returned to the Office of the respondent for taking further action. The communication/Report of the Directorate of Revenue Intelligence, dated 04.10.2011 is Annexure-K. Subsequent to the said communication, the petitioner entity has sent three communications by Fax and Registered Post dated 13.10.2011, 20.10.2011 and 11.11.2011 to the respondent seeking clearance and release of the goods. It was also informed that the imports were in bulk pack and labelling requirements will not apply to such packs and the petitioner intends to repack the same into smaller retails packs on which labelling requirement would be met before local sale. These communications collectively are Annexure-L. 2.7. In the meantime, the office of the respondent drew further samples from the consignments and sent it to the Referral Food Laboratory, CFTRI, Mysore, the Nodal Agency in terms of Section 4 of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954, as amended. The said Laboratory under Reports dated 13.12.2011, has now found that the samples confirm to the fact that it is indeed Monosodium Glutamate, a Food Additive falling under the Food Safety and Standards Act, 2006 and the Rules of 2011. The said reports collectively are Annexure-M. Pursuant to the said reports, the petitioner has once again requisitioned the respondent to issue a Show Cause Notice for adjudication. The petitioner, through its Custom House Agent has also approached the office of the respondent for assessment and clearance of the goods, but of no avail or appropriate response from the respondent and functionaries under the same. Having no other alternative, except to approach this Court, the petitioner has come up with the present writ petition.
(iii) Since the goods in question seized by DRI, Tuticorin were under investigation for the violation of the provisions of the Act and Rules read with the provisions of the Customs Act, 1962, the contention of the petitioner that the seizure is without authority of law is not sustainable.
(iv) The imported goods are subjected to clearance only if it confirms to the Act read with Food Safety and Standard Act, 2006. Samples were drawn and forwarded to the Referral Food Laboratory, CFTRI, Mysore. The Director, CFTRI, Mysore gave his opinion vide their Certificates No.502P/FSSA/2011; 503P/FSSA/2011 & 504P/FSSA/2011, all dated 13.12.2011 that "samples conform as a permitted Food Additive (Monosodium Glutamate) under the Food Safety and Standards Act, 2006 and Rules, 2011 thereof". In the said Report, the label details were mentioned as: