Special import licence and comparable valuation principles limit retrospective restriction and value enhancement for imported goods.

A special import licence must be read with the item list attached at the time of issue, and a later EXIM policy amendment or DGFT clarification cannot retrospectively restrict imports already covered by that licence. The document also notes that valuation enhancement based on an earlier import is not justified where the present goods differ materially in quantity and country of origin, because comparable-value comparisons require substantially similar import conditions. On these facts, the earlier licence governed clearance and the proposed enhancement of value lacked a proper comparable basis, so the Revenue's challenge failed.

---

---

Issues: (i) Whether the amended EXIM policy and later DGFT clarification could be applied to deny clearance of goods imported against a Special Import Licence issued earlier with an attached item list; (ii) Whether the value of the imported kitchen sets could be enhanced on the basis of an earlier import made by the same importer.

Issue (i): Whether the amended EXIM policy and later DGFT clarification could be applied to deny clearance of goods imported against a Special Import Licence issued earlier with an attached item list.

Analysis: The licence was issued with a specific attached list permitting import of the relevant electronic toys/games, and there was no finding that the imported items were outside that list. The later policy amendment effective from 1-4-95 could not be applied to a licence issued earlier merely because the policy changed subsequently. The clarification issued by DGFT on 30-4-96 also did not assist the Revenue because the imports in question had already been made before that clarification.

Conclusion: The import was governed by the earlier licence and list attached to it, and the Revenue's objection based on the later amendment failed.

Issue (ii): Whether the value of the imported kitchen sets could be enhanced on the basis of an earlier import made by the same importer.

Analysis: The present import involved a much larger quantity than the earlier import and was also from a different country of origin. Comparable values can be adopted only where the goods are substantially similar in relevant respects, including quantity and surrounding import conditions. On these facts, the earlier import was not a proper basis for enhancement under the valuation rules.

Conclusion: The enhancement of value was not justified.

Final Conclusion: The impugned order of the lower appellate authority was sustained, with the result that the Revenue's challenge failed in full.

Ratio Decidendi: A special import licence must be construed according to the conditions and item list attached to it at the time of issue, and a subsequent policy amendment or later clarification cannot retrospectively restrict imports already covered by that licence; for valuation, an earlier import is not a reliable comparable where material differences in quantity and country of origin exist.

---