Import restriction liability is judged at the time of import, and later withdrawal of licensing rules does not erase confiscation.

Import restrictions were tested at the point when import was completed on entry of the goods into India's territorial waters, not at the later stage of bill of entry or clearance. Because the importer had no required licence at shipment, at import, or before clearance, confiscation under section 111(d) of the Customs Act was upheld. The later withdrawal of the licensing requirement did not erase the existing liability, as the saving provision preserved liabilities and proceedings notwithstanding amendment or rescission of the relevant notification. The Tribunal, however, found the original redemption fine and penalty excessive and reduced both.

---

---

Issues: (i) Whether imported goods were liable to confiscation under section 111(d) of the Customs Act when the importer did not hold the required licence at the time the goods entered the territorial waters of India, despite the subsequent withdrawal of the licensing requirement; and (ii) whether the redemption fine and penalty required reduction.

Issue (i): Whether imported goods were liable to confiscation under section 111(d) of the Customs Act when the importer did not hold the required licence at the time the goods entered the territorial waters of India, despite the subsequent withdrawal of the licensing requirement.

Analysis: Import is complete when goods are brought into India from a place outside India, and India includes its territorial waters. On that basis, the relevant point of time for testing the prohibition is the moment of import, not the later date of filing the bill of entry or clearance. The relaxation in the policy for goods covered by a licence obtained later was held inapplicable because the importer had no licence at shipment, at import, or before clearance. The amendment withdrawing the licence requirement could not wipe out the existing obligation, as the statutory saving provision preserved liabilities and proceedings notwithstanding amendment or rescission of the relevant notification or order.

Conclusion: The confiscation under section 111(d) of the Customs Act was upheld, and the issue was decided against the assessee.

Issue (ii): Whether the redemption fine and penalty required reduction.

Analysis: While sustaining confiscation, the Tribunal considered the facts and circumstances and found the original monetary consequences excessive to that extent.

Conclusion: The redemption fine and penalty were reduced.

Final Conclusion: The appeal succeeded only to the limited extent of reduction in redemption fine and penalty, while the confiscation of the goods was maintained.

Ratio Decidendi: The legality of import restrictions and confiscation is determined with reference to the date when import is completed by entry into Indian territorial waters, and a later amendment withdrawing a licensing requirement does not retrospectively erase liability already incurred.

---