Union Of India And Ors vs Apar Private Ltd. And Ors on 22 July, 1999
2. I have heard both sides. It is a fact that bills of entry show that the goods were imported through Nhava Sheva. Although the goods were ultimately cleared from ICD, Patparganj, Delhi, the requirement of the Notification is that drugs imported by sea into India are to be imported through certain ports including Nhava Sheva. Therefore, the contention of the importer that the import is to be treated as through Nhava Sheva, which is a prescribed port, and hence they have not violated the port restrictions provided under Rule 43A is required to be accepted. Reliance placed by the learned DR on the Honble Apex Courts decisions in Union of India vs Apar Pvt. Ltd., 1999 (112) ELT 3 (SC) and Commissioner of Customs, Calcutta vs Biecco Lawrie Ltd., 2008 (223) ELT 3 (SC), is misplaced as the judgments are not applicable to the facts of the present case as the issue therein was as to the relevant date for rate of duty in terms of Section 15(1) and Section 68.