Import control breach and admitted unauthorised import can justify confiscation under customs law; waiver of hearing defeats procedural challenge.

Imported consignments brought duty free under the Import Export Passbook Scheme were held liable to confiscation where the alleged beneficiary disowned the goods and the importer admitted unauthorised importation. The licence of the disowning entity could not legitimise the import, which was treated as a breach of Section 3(2) of the Imports and Exports (Control) Act, 1947 and actionable under Section 111(d) of the Customs Act, 1962. The procedural challenge also failed because the record showed that show cause notice and personal hearing had been waived, defeating the objection based on ex parte adjudication.

---

---

Issues: (i) Whether the imported consignments, brought in duty free under the Import Export Passbook Scheme and disowned by the alleged beneficiary, were liable to confiscation under the Customs Act for being imported in violation of import control law; (ii) Whether the order of confiscation was vitiated for want of show cause notice and personal hearing.

Issue (i): Whether the imported consignments, brought in duty free under the Import Export Passbook Scheme and disowned by the alleged beneficiary, were liable to confiscation under the Customs Act for being imported in violation of import control law.

Analysis: The goods were disowned by the entity for whom they were allegedly imported, and the importer admitted both importation and the unauthorised nature of the import. The licence of the disowning entity could not be relied upon by the appellant to legitimise the import. The import was therefore found to be in breach of Section 3(2) of the Imports and Exports (Control) Act, 1947 and the goods were treated as liable to confiscation under Section 111(d) of the Customs Act, 1962.

Conclusion: The confiscation was upheld and the objection to confiscability was rejected.

Issue (ii): Whether the order of confiscation was vitiated for want of show cause notice and personal hearing.

Analysis: The record showed that the adjudicating authority had waived issue of show cause notice and personal hearing. On that basis, the challenge founded on ex parte disposal was held to be without merit.

Conclusion: The procedural challenge was rejected.

Final Conclusion: The impugned confiscation order was sustained in full and the appeal failed.

Ratio Decidendi: Goods imported in violation of import control restrictions and admitted to be unauthorised are liable to confiscation under the Customs Act, and a recorded waiver of notice and hearing defeats a challenge based on lack of opportunity.

---