Requirement Of Import Permit Does Not Arise When Acrylonitrile Is Imported For Non-Insecticidal Use: Gujarat High Court

The petitioner had approached the High Court seeking issuance of a direction calling for the records pertaining to the petitioner's case, and also a direction to the respondents to allow the petitioner to import Acrylonitrile without insisting on an import permit.

The Division Bench of Justice A.S. Supehia and Justice Pranav Trivedi held, “Having not denied by the respondents that Acrylonitrile imported by the petitioner is for non-insecticidal use as per clause (b) of Section 38 of the Act of 1968, none of the provisions of the Act of 1968 would apply and as a consequence thereof, the requirement of registration as per Section 9 of the Act would not be mandatory and as a sequel the requirement of any import permit from respondent no.7 does not arise.”

Advocate Anand Nainawati represented the Petitioner, while Advocate Ankit Shah represented the Respondent.

Factual Background

The petitioners are engaged in the manufacturing and selling of synthetic rubbers, and for the manufacture of their finished goods, one of the major raw materials used by the petitioners is Acrylonitrile (ACN). It was the case of the petitioner that the petitioner is importing Acrylonitrile by classifying the same under Tariff Item 29261000 under the Customs Tariff Act, 1975, which specifically covers Acrylonitrile, and all imports/exports are governed by the provisions of the Foreign Trade Policy issued under the provisions of the Foreign Trade (Development and Regulation) Act, 1992.

An Order-in-Original was issued by the Joint Commissioner of Customs, Hazira Port, holding that any insecticide imported for non-insecticidal purposes would not be governed by any of the provisions of the Act of 1968. The petitioners filed a representation stating that the Public Notice was contrary to Section 38 of the Act of 1968, and they could not be forced to apply for an import permit. However, since no response was received, the petitioners filed the writ petitions before the High Court.

Arguments

It was the case of the petitioners that the provisions of Section 38 of the Act of 1968 exempt the importer from such registration if such items, which are specified in the Schedule, are imported or intended for other purposes. However, the respondent authority, by applying Public Notice dated February 17, 2022, had made it mandatory as regard to import permit of ACN for non-insecticidal use.

Reasoning

The Bench noted that the predicament of the petitioner originated from the impugned Public Notice dated February 17, 2022, wherein it was declared that the mandatory import permit was required for the import of Acrylonitrile for non-insecticidal use. The Bench further stated that the Acrylonitrile imported by the petitioner was used by them in the manufacturing of goods like rubber items, which would not fall in any of the purposes mentioned in Section 38 of the Act of 1968. Hence, the petitioners did not apply to the Registration Committee for the import of such items.

It was noticed that Section 38 of the Act of 1968 introduces an exemption for attracting the provisions of the Act of 1968 to substances which are used for non-insecticidal purposes. The Bench was of the view that the Public Notice ran contrary to the intention of the Act as promulgated in Section 38 of the Act of 1968

“In view of the order dated 14.11.2025 passed by us, directing respondent no.3 to verify that as to whether any other notification is issued or not barring the use of Acrylonitrile, it is submitted that no such notification has been issued by the Central Government and on the contrary as per the latest notification dated 15.10.2025 being Notification No.44/2025-26 issued by Ministry of Commerce and Industry it does not in any manner mandates the requirement of registration as well as import permit for importing the substance Acrylonitrile. Hence Public Notice F.No.04-01/2022/CIR-I dated 17.02.2022 will not apply to the substance Acrylonitrile imported by the petitioners”, it held.

Thus, allowing the Petition, the Bench quashed the impugned Public Notice and set it aside to the extent it applies to the Acrylonitrile.

Cause Title: Apcotex Industries Ltd. v. Union of India (Neutral Citation: 2025:GUJHC:66881-DB)

Appearance

Petitioner: Advocate Anand Nainawati

Respondent: Advocates Ankit Shah, C B Gupta, Priyank P Lodha(7852)

Click here to read/download Order