Bill of lading governs import restriction timing, and detained cargo cannot attract demurrage under the cargo regulations.

For import-restriction disputes under the foreign trade regime, the bill of lading was treated as the ative date where the policy made it the relevant reference point, and Section 15 of the Customs Act did not control the question of import prohibition. The Court also distinguished between dhalls and peas under the applicable notifications, holding that the dhall consignments were not covered by the embargo, while peas shipped during the protected period could not be withheld by later restrictive notifications because such restrictions operated prospectively and could not defeat an accrued import entitlement. Detained cargo was further held to attract the bar on rent or demurrage under the cargo-handling regulations, so waiver of demurrage applied.

---

---

Issues: (i) Whether the relevant date for reckoning import of the consignments was the date of the bill of lading or the bill of entry; (ii) whether there was any embargo on import of the dhalls covered by the writ petition; (iii) whether there was any embargo on import of peas imported during the relevant period and covered by the bills of lading; (iv) whether the petitioner was entitled to waiver of demurrage charges for the detained consignments.

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

Analysis: Paragraph 9.11 of the Foreign Trade Policy treated the bill of lading as the relevant date for reckoning import. The policy was treated as a complete code for that purpose, and the reference to Section 15 of the Customs Act, 1962, which fixes the date for determination of duty, was held not to govern the question of import restriction. The Court followed the principle that the crucial date is the date on which the import transaction crystallised under the foreign trade regime.

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

Issue (ii): Whether there was any embargo on import of the dhalls covered by the writ petition.

Analysis: The restriction notifications in relation to dhalls were examined along with the admitted factual position that the concerned dhall consignments were not covered by the time-bound restriction in the same manner as peas. On that basis, the Court treated the dhall consignments as not hit by the embargo for the purpose of the writ petition.

Conclusion: There was no embargo preventing release of the dhall consignments covered by the writ petition.

Issue (iii): Whether there was any embargo on import of peas imported during the relevant period and covered by the bills of lading.

Analysis: The Court held that the operative restriction had to be tested with reference to the bill of lading date. Relying on the prospective character of import restrictions and the principle that a vested or accrued right cannot be taken away by a subsequent policy change, the Court concluded that consignments shipped during the protected period were not liable to be withheld merely because of later notifications. The balance of convenience and the subsisting stay of the notifications also supported release.

Conclusion: The peas covered by bills of lading during the relevant period were not liable to embargo and were directed to be released, subject to conditions.

Issue (iv): Whether the petitioner was entitled to waiver of demurrage charges for the detained consignments.

Analysis: Regulation 6(1)(l) of the Handling of Cargo in Customs Areas Regulations, 2009 barred charging rent or demurrage on goods seized or detained by customs officers. As the consignments had been detained by customs authorities, the regulatory bar on demurrage applied.

Conclusion: The petitioner was entitled to waiver of demurrage charges.

Final Conclusion: The consignments were directed to be released subject to payment of duty where leviable and furnishing of bank guarantee in the prescribed manner, and demurrage was waived; the writ petition was disposed of on those terms.

Ratio Decidendi: For import-restriction disputes under the foreign trade regime, the bill of lading is the decisive date where the policy so provides, and a subsequent restrictive notification operates prospectively so as not to defeat an accrued import entitlement; detained cargo is also protected from demurrage where the governing cargo regulations so mandate.

---