Import confiscation based on an omitted notification clause cannot be sustained once the clause is deleted before adjudication.

Confiscation, redemption fine and penalty cannot be sustained where the import prohibition relied on had been omitted before the adjudication order was passed. The action in this matter was based on Clause V of Notification No. 1/64-Cus., but that clause had already been deleted by Notification No. 61/2000-Cus. (N.T.) when the order was made. As the enabling prohibition was no longer in force on the relevant date, the adjudicatory consequences could not rest on the omitted provision and were set aside.

---

---

Issues: Whether confiscation, redemption fine, and penalty could be sustained when the provision invoked for prohibition of import had been omitted before the order was passed.

Analysis: The goods were ordered to be confiscated and penal consequences were imposed by relying on Clause V of Notification No. 1/64-Cus. That clause had already been omitted by Notification No. 61/2000-Cus. (N.T.) before the adjudication order was made. Once the enabling prohibition was no longer in existence on the date of the order, the impugned action could not be supported by that deleted provision.

Conclusion: The confiscation order, redemption fine, and penalty were unsustainable and were set aside in favour of the assessee.

Ratio Decidendi: An adjudicatory order cannot be sustained on the basis of a notification clause that stood omitted prior to the passing of the order.

---