Key Points: - (!) Agricas judgment upholding notifications and rejecting bona fide importers’ claims; imports under interim orders treated as contrary to FTDR and dealt with under Customs Act. - (!) (!) Orders-in-original dated 28.08.2020 confiscation with redemption option; DGFT objections and subsequent release actions. - (!) Supreme Court concludes final relief: subject goods liable to absolute confiscation; re-export option possible with redemption fine; otherwise absolute confiscation. - (!) (!) (!) FTDR Act Section 3(2)-(3) and deeming provision converting restricted goods to prohibited under Section 11 of Customs Act. - (!) (!) Section 125(1) discretionary to pay fine in lieu of confiscation for goods not absolutely prohibited; appellate review of discretion standards. - (!) (!) Final directions: set aside High Court orders; approve Appellate Authority orders; two-week window for re-export upon redemption; otherwise confiscation.

What is the status of whether imported peas/pulses under FTDR Act notifications dated 29.03.2019 and trade notice 16.04.2019 are to be treated as prohibited goods or restricted goods under the Customs Act?

What is the correct ambit and exercise of discretion under Section 125 of the Customs Act for goods deemed prohibited versus other goods, including whether redemption on payment of fines can be allowed or absolute confiscation is warranted?

What is the legality and propriety of the High Court’s interim relief orders directing release of goods in light of Agricas and the subsequent appellate judgments under FTDR Act and Customs Act?