Import policy misuse and abetment failed where evidence showed import in own right under open general licence and high sea sale transfer.

Liability for contravention and abetment in import policy misuse was rejected where the record showed the importer opened the letter of credit, remitted funds, and imported goods in its own right under the open general licence scheme before a high sea sale transfer. The alleged role as a letter-of-authority holder was unsupported, and the missing letter of authority could not be used to sustain adverse findings. The analysis also notes that the appellate authority proceeded on an incorrect assumption that open general licence imports were subject to an actual user condition. The impugned adjudication and appellate orders were therefore unsustainable.

---

---

Issues: Whether the petitioner could be held liable for contravention and abetment in the misuse of import policy when the goods were imported under open general licence and subsequently sold on high sea sale basis, and whether the impugned adjudication and appellate orders could stand.

Analysis: The record indicated that the petitioner had opened the letter of credit, remitted funds, and that the bills of lading and bill of entry supported its case that the import was made in its own right under the open general licence scheme and later transferred by high sea sale. The finding that the petitioner acted as a letter-of-authority holder for another importer was unsupported, and the respondents had not produced the alleged letter of authority. The Court held that the petitioner could not be required to prove a negative and that the conclusion of abetment and misuse was without basis. It was also noticed that the appellate authority proceeded on an incorrect understanding that the imports under open general licence were subject to an actual user condition.

Conclusion: The petitioner was not liable for the alleged contravention or abetment, and the impugned orders were unsustainable.

---