Page 125 - ELT_1st June 2020_VOL 372_Part 5th

2020 ] V.V. TITANIUM PIGMENTS PVT. LTD. v. DISTRICT COLLECTOR, THOOTHUKUDI 659

Policy document dealing with general provisions regarding imports and
exports at para 2.03 states as follows :
“2.03 Compliance of imports with Domestic Laws :
(a) Domestic Laws/Rules/Orders/Regulations/technical speci-
fications/environmental/safety and health norms applicable to domes-
tically produced goods shall apply, mutatis mutandis, to imports, unless
specifically exempted.
(b) However, goods to be utilized/consumed in manufacture of
export products, as notified by DFT, may be exempted from domestic
standards/quality specifications.”
14. In reply to the same, the Learned Counsel for the petitioner con-
tended that any minerals even if legally mined, the State Government has got
powers, but Section 23C is inapplicable to the present case as has been held in the
decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court, cited supra. In this regard, it is pertinent
to advert to paragraph 28 of the counter-affidavit filed by the first respond-
ent/District Collector, Tuticorin :
“28. With regard to the averments made in para 22 of the affidavit, it
is submitted that as per sub-section 4(1A) of the Act, no person shall
transport or store or cause to be transported or store any mineral otherwise
than in accordance with the provisions of the Act and the Rules made
thereunder. Apart from that as per sub-rule (2) of Rule 3 of the Tamil Nadu
Prevention of Illegal Mining, Transportation and Storage of Minerals and
Mineral Dealers Rules, 2011, no person other than the mineral dealer shall
store or cause to be stored any mineral at any place for the purpose of sale
or consumption. As the petitioner had been engaged in the mineral trade
from the year 2017 onwards, without registering themselves as a mineral
dealer, the District Authorities, having jurisdiction over the area had in-
spected the plant site of the petitioner company and seized the unlawfully
stored mineral under the powers vested with them under Section 21(4) of
the Act, 1957 for contravening the provisions of Section 4(1A) of the Act
and Rule 3 of the said rules and FIR was also registered against the peti-
tioner company for the said offence.”
15. Though in the above para it is stated that the District Authorities in-
spected the petitioner company and seized the unlawfully stored mineral under
the powers vested with them, so far, no seizure or confiscation order passed or
served on the petitioner. The Learned Counsel for the petitioner also invited the
attention of this Court to Section 45(6)(a) of the Mineral Conservation and Devel-
opment Rules, 2017, which reads as follows :
“45. Monthly and annual returns. -
xxx xxx xxx
(6) Any person or company engaged in trading or storage or end-use
or export of minerals, shall submit to the Indian Bureau of Mines and con-
cerned State Government, where the said person or company is sourcing
the minerals, the returns in the following manner, namely :-
(i) a monthly return which shall be submitted before the 10th
of every month in respect of preceding month in Form N;”
16. If the above Rules are not complied with, it is open to the authority
to invoke Rule 45(7) of the said Rules. But, however, there is no such action taken
by the respondents. It is further stated that as the petitioner has been complying
EXCISE LAW TIMES  1st June 2020  125