Binding import-policy interpretation governs licence scope, sustaining confiscation and proportional redemption fine for restricted almonds in shell.

Where the import policy confers final interpretative authority on the designated import-control authority, its clarification governs the scope of the REP licence and the legality of the import. On that binding interpretation, almonds in shell were treated as consumer goods falling within the restricted category and were not validly importable under the licence; confiscation was therefore sustained. The redemption fine and personal penalty were also upheld because the adjudicating authority had considered the margin of profit, the value of the goods, and the nature of the contravention, and no reason was shown to interfere with the quantified sanctions.

---

---

Issues: (i) whether almonds in shell imported against the REP licence under G.2(i)(a) of Appendix 17 were covered by the licence and were not hit by the restriction in Appendix 2 Part B; (ii) whether the redemption fine and personal penalty imposed on confiscation required interference.

Issue (i): whether almonds in shell imported against the REP licence under G.2(i)(a) of Appendix 17 were covered by the licence and were not hit by the restriction in Appendix 2 Part B.

Analysis: The import policy vested final interpretative authority in the Chief Controller of Imports and Exports, whose clarification was sought by the Customs authorities on the very consignment. The clarification stated that almond is a consumer item falling under Appendix 2-B and cannot be imported under REP licence. The fact that the horticultural opinion described the goods as viable seeds did not displace the binding policy clarification. The argument that the item had to be expressly named in Appendix 2 Part B was rejected, as the policy language covered consumer goods of agricultural origin broadly. The plea based on end-use and on the existence of a contrary interpretation was also rejected in view of the finality attached by the policy to the competent authority's interpretation.

Conclusion: The almonds in shell were not validly importable under the REP licence and the confiscation was upheld.

Issue (ii): whether the redemption fine and personal penalty imposed on confiscation required interference.

Analysis: The quantum of redemption fine was examined with reference to the margin of profit, the value of the goods, and the nature of the contravention. The Collector had specifically considered these factors and had fixed the fine to avoid unlawful profit from the prohibited import. The personal penalties were also found to be proportionate in the context of the offence and the value of the goods. No sufficient ground was shown for reduction on parity with other cases, as each adjudication turned on its own facts and the present order contained a reasoned basis for the quantum imposed.

Conclusion: The fine and penalty did not call for reduction or modification.

Final Conclusion: The import was held to be unauthorised under the governing policy, and the orders of confiscation, redemption fine, and penalty were sustained in full.

Ratio Decidendi: Where the import policy confers final interpretative authority on the designated import-control authority, its clarification on the scope of a licence governs the legality of the import, and confiscation with consequential fine and penalty may be sustained when the import is contrary to that binding interpretation.

---