Just a moment...
Convert scanned orders, printed notices, PDFs and images into clean, searchable, editable text within seconds. Starting at 2 Credits/page
Try Now →Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether the restriction confining import of the goods to specified ports was valid, and whether the confiscation and penalty based on that restriction could stand.
Analysis: The Tribunal followed the Calcutta High Court's ruling that the power under Section 3 of the Import and Export (Control) Act, 1947 is directed to goods and not to the selection of particular ports through which the goods alone may be imported. It held that a restriction of this nature must operate generally and cannot validly single out Bombay and Delhi ICD while excluding other ports. The Tribunal also noted that the impugned public notice and order had been held ultra vires, that there was no rational basis for the selective port restriction, and that the conditions governing Open General Licence imports could not be extended to imports under Additional Licences on the basis relied upon by the department.
Conclusion: The port restriction was invalid and the confiscation and penalty could not be sustained.
Final Conclusion: The appeal succeeded and the importers obtained relief against the confiscation and penalty.
Ratio Decidendi: A restriction on import that selects only certain ports for otherwise permitted goods is not a valid exercise of power under the import control statute when the statutory power is directed to goods and not to the choice of port.