Bill of lading date governs import reckoning, limiting later restrictions and supporting release with demurrage protection.

For import-control purposes, the date of bill of lading governs when import is reckoned under the Foreign Trade Policy, and Section 15 of the Customs Act does not control that question. Consignments shipped while the earlier protected position was in force were treated as outside the later import restrictions for detention purposes. Release could be ordered on payment of duty where leviable, or on furnishing bank guarantees where duty impact was neutral, together with a further guarantee linked to invoice value. The cargo regulations were also relied on to prevent rent or demurrage being charged on detained goods in the stated circumstances.

---

---

Issues: (i) Whether the relevant date for reckoning import was the date of bill of lading or the date of bill of entry; (ii) whether the imported consignments of peas and dhalls were liable to be withheld under the impugned import restrictions; (iii) whether the petitioner was entitled to release of the consignments on conditions and to waiver of demurrage charges.

Issue (i): Whether the relevant date for reckoning import was the date of bill of lading or the date of bill of entry.

Analysis: Regulation 9.11 of the Foreign Trade Policy, 2015-20 treated the date of bill of lading as the relevant date for reckoning import. The Court held that the policy operated as a self-contained code for that purpose and that the reference to Section 15 of the Customs Act, 1962, which concerns determination of duty based on the bill of entry, did not govern the question of when the import was to be treated as having occurred.

Conclusion: The relevant date was the date of bill of lading, not the date of bill of entry.

Issue (ii): Whether the imported consignments of peas and dhalls were liable to be withheld under the impugned import restrictions.

Analysis: The consignments had been shipped when the stay order against the relevant notifications was in force. On the admitted facts, the Court treated the peas covered by bills of lading during the relevant period, and the dhall consignments, as falling outside any enforceable embargo for the purpose of detention in these writ petitions. The Court applied the principle that a later restrictive policy cannot retrospectively defeat an accrued position where the shipment had already crystallised under the earlier regime.

Conclusion: The consignments were not to be withheld on the basis of the impugned restrictions in these petitions.

Issue (iii): Whether the petitioner was entitled to release of the consignments on conditions and to waiver of demurrage charges.

Analysis: The Court directed release of the consignments upon payment of duty where leviable, or upon furnishing a bank guarantee where duty impact was neutral, together with a bank guarantee for 10% of the invoice value. It also relied on Rule 6(l) of the Handling of Cargo in Customs Areas Regulations, 2009, which prohibits charging rent or demurrage on detained goods in the stated circumstances.

Conclusion: The consignments were ordered to be released on the specified conditions and demurrage charges were waived.

Final Conclusion: The writ petition succeeded in substance, with conditional release of the detained consignments and ancillary relief of demurrage waiver, leaving departmental proceedings at liberty to be taken in accordance with law.

Ratio Decidendi: For import-control purposes under the applicable foreign trade regime, the date of bill of lading governs the reckoning of import, and a subsequently enforced restriction cannot be applied to defeat consignments already shipped while the earlier position protected the importers; detained goods are also entitled to demurrage protection where the governing cargo regulations so provide.

---