Tribunal overturns order, rules for appellant on import clarity, preventing retrospective impositions.

The Tribunal set aside the impugned order, ruling in favor of the appellant and allowing the appeal with consequential relief. The judgment emphasized the importance of regulatory clarity and consistency in import procedures, safeguarding against retrospective impositions on legitimate imports.

---

---

Issues:
1. Confiscation of goods under Section 111(d) and imposition of penalty under Section 112(a) by the adjudicating authority.
2. Rejection of appeal by the Commissioner of Customs (Appeals) Ahmedabad.
3. Appeal against the impugned Order-in-Appeal by the appellant.
4. Interpretation of Food Safety and Standards (Approval of Non-specified Food and Food Ingredients) Regulations, 2017.
5. Application of CBIC directive dated 21.05.2020 in the case.
6. Justification of confiscation, fine, and penalty in light of legal precedents.

Analysis:
1. The appellant imported Sajji Khar under a warehousing Bill of entry, certified by FSSAI. A show cause notice proposed confiscation under Section 111(d) due to non-compliance with Non-Specified Food Regulations. The adjudicating authority confiscated goods, allowed re-export on payment of redemption fine, and imposed a penalty. The appellant appealed the decision, leading to rejection by the Commissioner of Customs (Appeals).

2. The appellant argued that historical import practices and FSSAI certifications justified the import, challenging the application of CBIC Instruction dated 21.05.2020. Citing legal precedents, the appellant contended that even if re-exported, fines and penalties were unwarranted, especially considering incurred losses.

3. The revenue maintained that import without prior approval violated Food Safety Regulations, justifying confiscation and penalties. The Tribunal analyzed FSSAI clarifications, confirming that Sajji Khar did not require approval under the Regulations. The Tribunal also noted the import predating the CBIC Instruction, rendering it inapplicable retrospectively.

4. Considering the FSSAI clarifications and import certifications, the Tribunal found no fault in the appellant's compliance with relevant standards. The Tribunal emphasized that the CBIC Instruction could not be retroactively applied, especially when past imports of the same product faced no such conditions.

5. Consequently, the Tribunal set aside the impugned order, ruling in favor of the appellant and allowing the appeal with consequential relief. The judgment highlighted the importance of regulatory clarity and consistency in import procedures, safeguarding against retrospective impositions on legitimate imports.

---