Rika Global Impex Limited Vs Union of India (Bombay High Court)
Conclusion: Custom Authority had allowed the clearance of Pigeon Peas as there was valid registration of Advance Payment Certificate and registration certificate was binding on the respondents until the completion of the import quota mentioned therein and considering that assessee had imported the import item before 31.03.2021, assessee’s import was required to be declared as valid import under the FTP.
Held: Assessee-company was engaged in the business of import and export of agricultural commodities. It was a regular importer and exporter of agricultural produce including Pigeon Peas (Toor) from Sudan, Myanmar, Tanzania and Mozambique. Assessee had been allotted import / export code and accorded status of ‘Star Trading House’ by the DGFT. In the ordinary course of business assessee had entered into contract with the foreign supplier for purchase of Pigeon Peas; the contract was mutually amended from time to time vide 8 addendums whereby some terms of the contract were amended and shipment period was extended. Assessee’s contract for import of Pigeon Peas was under the provisions of the FTP, validity of which now stood extended till 31.03.2021. Assessee being covered by the conditions stated in the trade notice dated 31.08.2017 applied for registration of contract and was accordingly issued an Advance Payment Certificate i.e. registration certificate by the DGFT on the basis of advance payment made to its supplier. DGFT issued 5 RCs to assessee against the trade notice dated 31.08.2017.Assessee imported Pigeon Peas against 4 RCs to the extent of 11000 MTs by 2018. Import against the 5th RC in respect of balance 11000 MTs was to be completed between 2018 to 2020. In view assessee’s contractual obligations shipment was to reach India between February and March 2020 but due to Covid – 19 pandemic and the resultant lockdown enforced by many countries there was delay and the shipment of Pigeon Peas arrived in the month of September 2020. Assessee’s shipment was not cleared for home consumption as a result of which assessee incurred demurrage / detention charges due to delay in clearance. Assessee therefore addressed letter to the DGFT seeking clarification as to whether the RC dated 06.09.2017 issued to assessee was valid for import of Pigeon Peas in the year 2020 and also sought clarification from the DGFT with respect to validity of its RC dated 06.09.2017. It was held that the RC was binding on the respondents until the completion of the import quota mentioned therein and considering that assessee had imported the import item before 31.03.2021, assessee’s import was required to be declared as valid import under the FTP. Assessee’s application for import was specifically filed under notification dated 05.08.2017; only pre-condition prescribed therein being registration of contract if advance payment was made prior to 05.08.2017; assessee qualified such pre-condition considering that its contract was registered on 26.05.2017 in respect of the import item and advance payment already made; the subsequent addendums did not vary the principal contract save and except the date of shipment and the country of origin. On perusal of the notification dated 05.08.2017 it could not be said that it imposed restriction to complete the import of goods only during the fiscal year 2017-18; though there was a reference to the fiscal year appearing in condition No.2 of the said notification as regards the quota of 2 lakh MT per annum; this reference was merely for the purposes of procedure to be notified for such import in terms of para 2.08 of the FTP; however the subsequent trade notice dated 31.08.2017 which directly concerns the assessee’s case in hand did not mention its applicability to the fiscal year 2017-2018 and categorically specifies its applicability to the contract under the FTP. Thus, the clearance of 2650 MT of Pigeon Peas for home consumption was allowable to assessee forthwith; Considering the lapse of time from the date of fling of the petition i.e. November 2020 till the present order was passed, Respondents shall allow clearance of the balance 8350 MT of Pigeon Peas if imported by assessee for home consumption under the RC File upto a period of 6 weeks from the date of passing of the present order.
FULL TEXT OF THE HIGH COURT ORDER /JUDGEMENT
Heard Mr. Vineet Naik, learned senior advocate for the petitioner; Mr. Pradeep S. Jetly, learned senior advocate for respondent Nos.1 to 3; and Mr. Rui Rodrigues, learned advocate for respondent Nos.4 to 6.
2. By the present petition, petitioner has prayed for a writ of mandamus to respondent No.2 i.e. the Commissioner of Customs (NS-I) and respondent No.3 i.e. the Assistant Commissioner of Customs, Appraising Group – I & IA to allow clearance of 2,650 MTs of Pigeon Peas covered under Bill of Entry Nos. (i) 9029721 dated 02.10.2020, (ii) 9028987 dated 02.10.2020, (iii) 9028862 dated 02.10.2020, (iv) 8845847 dated 17.09.2020, (v) 8843086 dated 17.09.2020, (vi) 8842485 dated 17.09.2020, (vii) 8985829 dated 29.09.2020, (viii) 8987173 dated 29.09.2020, (ix) 8982222 dated 28.09.2020, (x) 8994149 dated 29.09.2020, (xi) 9008104 dated 02.10.2020, (xii) 9029328 dated 02.10.2020, and (xiii) 9029262 dated 02.10.2020 for home consumption (hereinafter referred to as “the bills of entry”) which have been held up inspite of having valid registration of Advance Payment Certifcate bearing File No.03/27/008/ 00161/AM18 dated 06.09.2017 and issued on 27.09.2017 by the office of the respondent No.5 i.e. the Director General of Foreign Trade (hereinafter referred to as “the DGFT”) permitting import of Pigeon Peas under the Foreign Trade Policy 2015-2020 (hereinafter referred to as “the FTP”).
3. Before we advert to the submissions made by learned counsel for the respective parties, it will be apposite to briefy refer to the relevant facts as pleaded for adjudication of the lis.
3.1. Petitioner is a company incorporated under the Companies Act, 2013 and engaged in the business of import and export of agricultural commodities. Petitioner is a regular importer and exporter of agricultural produce including Pigeon Peas (Toor) from Sudan, Myanmar, Tanzania and Mozambique. Petitioner has been allotted import / export code and accorded status of ‘Star Trading House’ by respondent No.5 i.e. the DGFT.
3.2. In the ordinary course of business petitioner had entered into contract dated 26.05.2017 with Agricom International General Trading LLC (hereinafter referred to as the “foreign supplier”) for purchase of Pigeon Peas; the contract was mutually amended from time to time vide 8 addendums whereby some terms of the contract were amended and shipment period was extended. Petitioner notified the addendums to the office of respondent No.6 i.e. the Additional Director General of Foreign Trade, Mumbai. Petitioner’s contract for import of Pigeon Peas is under the provisions of the FTP, validity of which now stands extended till 31.03.2021.
3.3. By notification No.19/2015-20 dated 05.08.2017, DGFT amended the import policy of certain items under Chapter 7 of the ITC (HS) 2017, whereby, import of Pigeon Peas was regulated / revised from ‘free’ to ‘restricted’ category stating that import shall be subject to an annual fiscal quota of 2 lakh MT. By trade notice No.13/2015-20 dated 11.08.2017 it was clarified that though 2 lakh MT was already imported during the said current fiscal year, import of Pigeon Peas in respect of which irrevocable letters of credit were opened prior to 05.08.2017 and subsequently registered with the jurisdictional Regional Authority as per provisions of the FTP was permitted. By another trade notice No.15/2015-20 dated 31.08.2017, DGFT provided further relaxation allowing registration of contracts for import of Pigeon Peas wherein advance payment had been made (full or in part) prior to 05.08.2017 and for which a contract / purchase invoice and payment details certified by the concerned bank were available.
3.4. Petitioner being covered by the conditions stated in the trade notice dated 31.08.2017 applied for registration of contract and was accordingly issued an Advance Payment Certificate vide File No.03/27/008/00161/AM18 dated 06.09.2017 i.e. registration certificate (hereinafter referred to as “the RC”) by the DGFT on the basis of advance payment made to its supplier. Initially the RC granted to the petitioner was for import of Pigeon Peas from Sudan; however subsequently by amendment sheet No.01 dated 02.11.2017, petitioner was permitted to import Pigeon Peas from Malawi, Myanmar, Mozambique and Tanzania.
3.5. DGFT issued 5 RCs to the petitioner against the trade notice dated 31.08.2017. Petitioner imported Pigeon Peas against 4 RCs to the extent of 11000 MTs by 2018. Import against the 5th RC in respect of balance 11000 MTs was to be completed between 2018 to 2020.
3.6. In view petitioner’s contractual obligations shipment was to reach India between February and March 2020 but due to Covid – 19 pandemic and the resultant lockdown enforced by many countries there was delay and the shipment of Pigeon Peas arrived in the month of September 2020. Initially petitioner filed 3 bills of entry bearing Nos. (i) 8845847 dated 17.09.2020, (ii) 8843086 dated 17.09.2020 and (iii) 8842485 dated 17.09.2020 seeking clearance of Pigeon Peas for home consumption.
3.7. Petitioner’s shipment was not cleared for home consumption by respondent Nos.2 & 3 as a result of which petitioner incurred demurrage / detention charges due to delay in clearance. Petitioner therefore addressed letter dated 22.09.2020 to the DGFT seeking clarification as to whether the RC dated 06.09.2017 issued to the petitioner was valid for import of Pigeon Peas in the year 2020 and also approached respondent No.3 who informed the petitioner that respondent No.3 had sought clarification from the DGFT with respect to validity of its RC dated 06.09.2017. During pendency of this action, additional quantity of Pigeon Peas imported by the petitioner arrived at Nhava Sheva port in Mumbai for which petitioner filed additional 10 bills of entry bearing Nos.(i) 9029721 dated 02.10.2020, (ii) 9028987 dated 02.10.2020, (iii) 9028862 dated 02.10.2020, (iv) 8985829 dated 29.09.2020, (v) 8987173 dated 29.09.2020, (vi) 8982222 dated 28.09.2020, (vii) 8994149 dated 29.09.2020, (viii) 9008404 dated 02.10.2020, (ix) 9029328 dated 02.10.2020 and (x) 9029262 dated 02.10.2020 seeking clearance for home consumption.
3.8. The total quantity of Pigeon Peas under the aforesaid 13 bills of entry is 2650 MT clearance of which is the subject matter of the present writ petition. Petitioner has pleaded that the balance 8350 MT of Pigeon Peas is also ready to be shipped by its foreign supplier, but due to detention of the present consignment, petitioner has requested its foreign supplier to keep the shipment on hold for the present.
3.9. Since petitioner’s goods are perishable in nature, by letter dated 29.09.2020 addressed to the Deputy Commissioner of Customs, petitioner sought permission for storage of the goods in bonded warehouse under Section 49 of the Customs Act, 1962 to avoid detention and ground rent charges.
3.10. Thereafter petitioner entered into correspondence with the respondents seeking clarification on the validity of its RC but received no reply. By letter dated 10.11.2020 petitioner requested Deputy Commissioner of Customs (Import) to permit the petitioner to convert the bills of entry from home consumption to warehousing so as to enable the petitioner to transfer the goods to the actual warehouse who was the license holder in order to stop further losses being sufered by the petitioner due to non-clearance of the goods and due to its perishable nature. Petitioner also addressed online complaint on 12.11.2020 to the Grievance Redressal Committee of the FTP.
3.11. By letter dated 12.11.2020 respondent No.3 i.e. Assistant Commissioner of Customs, Appraising Group – I & IA rejected the petitioner’s request for conversion of the 13 bills of entry from home consumption to warehousing.
3.12. Being aggrieved by the non-clearance of the shipment of approximately 2650 MT of Pigeon Peas imported vide RC dated 06.09.2017 under the 13 bills of entry, petitioner has approached this Court by the present petition seeking the relief(s) as indicated above.
4. Mr. Vineet Naik, learned senior counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner, at the outset has informed that the tenure of the FTP 2015-2020 now stands extended till 31.03.2021 vide notification dated 31.03.2020. He submitted that import against 4 RCs was completed by the petitioner in 2018, whereas import against the 5th RC was to be completed between 2018 to 2020; import was thus continuous from the date of issuance of the RCs to the petitioner; RC dated 06.09.2017 issued to the petitioner was without specifying any validity period or date of shipment but categorically stated that the RC would remain valid till the entire quantity is imported; petitioner extended the contract mutually with its foreign supplier from time to time, intimation of which was given to the DGFT at all times; petitioner’s RC was fully covered by the Notification dated 05.08.2017 and the clarificatory trade notices dated 11.08.2017 and 31.08.2017 issued under the FTP; there was no embargo on the petitioner to import the goods only during the fiscal year 2017-18 as contended by respondents and the import of the entire quantity of goods could be made during the tenure of the FTP. He submitted that since petitioner’s contract was
entered into prior to 05.08.2017, RC issued to the petitioner did not mention any expiry date; as such the validity of the RC is till the FTP is in force or till completion of import, whichever is earlier; hence petitioner is entitled to clearance of the imported goods under the RC and non-clearance of the goods is illegal and contrary to the provisions of the FTP.
5. PER CONTRA Mr. Rui Rodrigues, learned counsel appearing on behalf of respondent Nos.4 to 6 has defended the action of non-clearance of the goods and in this connection has drawn our attention to the affidavit-in-reply dated 05.01.2021 and additional affidavits dated 21.01.2021 and 02.03.2021 filed by the DGFT and contended that validity of the RC issued to the petitioner was only for the fiscal year 2017-18 and date of expiry of the RC is the date of expiry of the notification; petitioner’s claim that its contract and addendums be treated as a single document did not find any import in view of the relaxation provided by trade notice dated 31.08.2017 in respect of paragraph 1.05 of the FTP; trade notice being issued in order to address the genuine hardship faced by importers / exporters; no relaxation criteria for extension of contract was prescribed in the trade notice; thus in the absence of any explicit relaxation or extension, validity of the petitioner’s shipment in 2020 as per petitioner’s contract is to be considered as on the date of registration of the contract and it cannot be extended indefinitely by various addendums allegedly addressed to the office of the Additional Director General of Foreign Trade ; the said office did not accept / receive the alleged addendums as no computerised acknowledgment was issued to the petitioner; notification dated 05.08.2017 was specifically issued to restrict import of Pigeon Peas in order to protect the domestic farmers from unbridled imports; this notification imposed restriction on the import of annual quota; notification dated 31.08.2017 was issued only to protect the importers who had already entered into contracts with advance payment prior to 05.08.2017 and relaxation was provided beyond the quota but the same was to be completed during the fiscal year 2017-18 and could not be extended indefinitely by entering into addendums; thus in the absence of any validity endorsed on the RC issued to the petitioner, the quantity, value and shipment period in the contract as on the date of registration has to be treated as a limiting factor; contention of the petitioner that the FTP permitted import under the RC for the entire duration of FTP is erroneous as trade notice dated 31.08.2017 allowed for registration of contracts as per the terms of the contract as on the date of its registration with the balance value, quantity and shipment period available in the contract as the limiting factor; the relaxation provided was only to alleviate the immediate suffering of the importers and could not be mis-utilized by extending the relaxation beyond the fiscal year 2017-18; petitioner while applying for amendment in the RC for adding country of origin did not mention that its contract was extended till 28.09.2020; the RC issued to the petitioner cannot be treated as open ended and it has to be linked with the notification and year of issuance i.e. 2017-18 only.
5.1. He referred to the additional affidavit dated 02.03.2021 and contended that petitioner was initially issued 2 RC’s of 11000 MTs each on the basis of its contract; petitioner’s application dated 05.09.2017 was considered by respondent No.6 in view of the contract entered into by the petitioner against advance payment made by the petitioner to its foreign supplier and consolidated RC bearing File No.03/27/008/ 00161/AM-18 dated 06.09.2017 permitting import of 26250 MT’s of Pigeon Peas under 5 different contracts for which 5 advance payments were made was issued; however on the request of the petitioner 5 separate RC’s in respect of 5 different contracts having separate registration numbers were issued to the petitioner; reading of trade notices dated 11.08.2017 and 31.08.2017 leave no doubt in mind that the applicability of any relaxation granted to the petitioner by way of amendment in the RC by respondent No.6 pertained only to the quota prescribed for the financial year 2017-18 and could never have been extended beyond the said fiscal year; contracts submitted by the petitioner clearly indicated that its shipments were due on 20 July / 20 September 2017; or August / 15 September 2017 or August / September 2017; and August / September / October 2017; in so far addendum No.1 to the contract dated 26.05.2017 is concerned though the shipment period was extended by 45 days, the extended period was however still within the fiscal year 2017-18 and was therefore permissible; hence the subsequent addendums submitted by the petitioner after issuance of the RC were invalid.
5.2. He submitted that Petitioner’s reliance on notification No.04/2015-2020 dated 25.04.2018 on the basis of which fresh RC dated 04.05.2018 for import of Yellow Peas for 200 MT was issued cannot be applied to the present case as it was in respect of the quota pertaining to the fiscal year 2018-19 and released with restriction for the period until 30.09.2018 as subsequently indicated in notification No.15/2015-2020 dated 02.07.2018; absence of validity explicitly on the RC dated 06.09.2017 issued to the petitioner did not entitle the petitioner to claim extension / relaxation beyond the fiscal year 2017-18 as it runs contrary to the spirit of the notification dated 05.08.2017 read with the two trade notices dated 11.08.2017 and 31.08.2017; reliance was placed on the clarification issued by the Deputy Director of General of Foreign Trade vide letter dated 24.12.2020 to the Commissioner of Customs, Nhava Sheva, inter alia, clarifying that in the case of the petitioner, validity of the RC was only for the fiscal year 2017-18 as the provision for registering RCs was made with reference to notification No.19/2015-2020 dated 05.08.2017 and the date of expiry is the date of lapse of notification i.e. 31.03.2018. He therefore prayed for dismissal of the petition on the basis of the above submissions.
6. Mr. Pradeep Jetly, learned senior counsel appearing on behalf of respondent Nos.1 to 3 in his reply, at the outset adopted the submissions made on behalf of respondent Nos.4 to 6 and has drawn our attention to the affidavit-in-reply dated 17.12.2020 filed by the Deputy Commissioner of Customs to contend that since the RC dated 06.09.2017 does not bear any validity or expiry clause, the matter was referred to the DGFT; extension of the original contract was never intimated by petitioner and the contract was never revalidated; therefore the petitioner is not entitled to the reliefs claimed in the petition.
7. Mr. Vineet Naik, learned senior counsel for the petitioner in his rejoinder submission has drawn our attention to the rejoinder affidavit and additional affidavits filed by the petitioner dated 01.01.2021, 08.01.2021 and 10.02.2021 and submitted that petitioner’s contract was admittedly prior to 05.08.2017 and the contract along with addendum No.1 dated 07.08.2017 was registered; RC was issued for the contract and addendums are to be treated as part of the contract; the addendums were duly intimated to the DGFT immediately on execution from time to time; while making application for amendment regarding addition of country of origin there was no necessity for the petitioner to seek extension of term of shipment as it was within the tenure of the FTP; the question of getting the addendums approved cannot arise as they are to be treated as part of the contract.
7.1. He submitted that notification dated 05.08.2017 nowhere states that it is valid only till 31.03.2018; notification dated 11.08.2017 made it clear that while issuing notification dated 05.08.2017 the annual quota of 2 lakh MT for the fiscal year was already imported, thus the contention that import was to be completed within the fiscal year is without merit; validity of RC is co-terminus with the validity of contract during the tenure of the FTP; contract of petitioner was not based on letters of credit but on advance payment and hence reliance placed on para 1.05 of the FTP requiring the petitioner to register with the jurisdictional R.A. was not applicable to the petitioner’s case.
7.2. He submitted that on 29.10.2020 Deputy Director of General of Foreign Trade, Zonal Additional DGFT Mumbai addressed an email to the Deputy Director General (PC-2) DGFT endorsing a copy to the Mumbai DGFT and Joint DGFT, inter alia, clarifying that the application of the petitioner was made under trade notice dated 31.08.2017 against advance payment to supplier and the shipping date as per proforma contract / addendums is 31.03.2021; RC is a document issued by the Ministry of Commerce and Industry, Government of India and nowhere mentions the validity or expiry date save and except the quantity to be imported; hence unless the entire quantity is imported, the RC remains valid during the tenure of the FTP; the DGFT cannot add something into the RC to contend that the RC is valid only for the first fiscal year of the FTP.
8. Submissions made by the parties have received the due consideration of the Court. Materials on record have been perused.
9. Before we advert to the submissions made by the respective counsel, it would be apposite to consider the relevant provisions of the Foreign Trade Policy 2015-2020 as applicable in the present case.
9.1. Chapter 1 of the Foreign Trade Policy (2015-2020) deals with the legal framework and trade facilitation. The relevant provisions are extracted as under:-
1.00 Legal Basis of Foreign Trade Policy (FTP)
The Foreign Trade Policy, 2015-20, (as updated) w.e.f. 05.12.2017 is notified by Central Government, in exercise of powers conferred under Section 5 of the Foreign Trade (Development & Regulation) Act, 1992 (No. 22 of 1992) [FT (D&R) Act], as amended.
1.01 Duration of FTP
The Foreign Trade Policy (FTP), 2015-2020, (as updated) w.e.f. 05.12.2017 incorporating provisions relating to export and import of goods and services, shall come into force with efect from the date of notification and shall remain in force upto 31st March, 2020, unless otherwise specified. All exports and imports made up to the date of notification shall, accordingly, be governed by the relevant FTP, unless otherwise specified.
1.02 Amendment to FTP
Central Government, in exercise of powers conferred by Section 5 of FT (D&R) Act, 1992, as amended from time to time, reserves the right to make any amendment to the FTP, by means of notification, in public interest.
1.03 Hand Book of Procedures (HBP) and Appendices & Aayat Niryat Forms (AANF)
Director General of Foreign Trade (DGFT) may, by means of a Public Notice, notify Hand Book of Procedures, including Appendices and Aayat Niryat Forms or amendment thereto, if any, laying down the procedure to be followed by an exporter or importer or by any Licensing / Regional Authority or by any other authority for purposes of implementing provisions of FT (D&R) Act, the Rules and the Order made there under and provisions of FTP.
1.04 Specifc provision to prevail over the general
Where a specific provision is spelt out in the FTP/Hand Book of Procedures (HBP), the same shall prevail over the general provision.
1.05 Transitional Arrangements
(a) Any License / Authorisation / Certificate / Scrip / instrument bestowing financial or fiscal benefit issued before commencement of FTP, 2015-20 (as updated) w.e.f. 05.12.2017 shall continue to be valid for the purpose and duration for which it was issued, such License / Authorisation / Certificate / Scrip / any instrument bestowing financial or fiscal benefit Authorisation was issued, unless otherwise stipulated.
(b) Item wise Import / Export Policy is delineated in the ITC (HS) Schedule I and Schedule II respectively. The importability /exportability of a particular item is governed by the policy as on the date of import / export. The date of import / export is defined in para 2.17 of HBP, 2015-20. Bill of Lading and Shipping Bill are the key documents for deciding the date of import and export respectively. In case of change of policy from ‘free’ to ‘restricted / prohibited / state trading’ or ‘otherwise regulated’, the import /export already made before the date of such regulation / restriction will not be affected. However the import through High Sea sales will not be covered under this facility. Further, the import / export on or after the date of such regulation / restriction will be allowed for importer / exporter has a commitment through Irrevocable Commercial Letter of Credit (ICLC) before the date of imposition of such restriction / regulation and shall be limited to the balance quantity, value and period available in the ICLC. For operational listing such ICLC, the applicant shall have to register the ICLC with jurisdictional RA against computerized receipt within 15 days of imposition of any such restriction / regulation. Whenever, Government brings out a policy change of a particular item, the change will be applicable prospectively (from the date of Notification) unless otherwise provided for.
9.2. From the above it can be seen that paragraph No.1.01 of chapter 1 of the FTP states that the FTP shall come into force with effect from the date of notification and shall remain in force upto 31.03.2020, unless otherwise specified as stated; the said policy now stands extended upto 31.03.2021. Paragraph No.1.05 relates to transitional arrangements and clause (b) thereof states that in case of change of policy from ‘free’ to restricted / prohibited / state trading or otherwise regulated, the import / export already made before the date of such regulation / restriction will not be afected. It further states that any import / export on or after the date of such regulation / restriction will be allowed for the importer / exporter if he has a commitment through Irrevocable Commercial Letter of Credit (ICLC) before the date of imposition of such restriction / regulation. Clause (b) however does not apply to the case of an importer / exporter whose commitment is through advance payment which needs to be noted in the present case.
9.3. Notification No.18/2015-20 dated 05.08.2017 issued by the DGFT pertaining to amendment in the import policy of Pigeon Peas is relevant to the present case and is extracted as under :-
Government of India
Ministry of Commerce and Industry
Department of Commerce
Directorate General of Foreign Trade
Notification No. 19/2015-2020
New Delhi, Dated : 05 August, 2017
Subject : Amendment in import policy of Pigeon Peas (Cajanus Cajan) / Toor Dal under Chapter 7 of the ITC (HS) 2017, Schedule-I (Import Policy).
S.O. (E) : In exercise of powers conferred by Section 3 of FT (D&R) Act, 1992 read with paragraph 1.02 and 2.01 of the Foreign Trade Policy, 2015-2020 as amended from time to time, the Central Government hereby amends the import policy of items of Chapter 7 of the ITC(HS)2017. Schedule-I (Import Policy) as under:
