Project-import eligibility depends on importation after contract registration, not on the purchase-order date.

The petitioner imported five consignments of fasteners and one filter cartridge for a 400 MLD desalination plant under a contract with the Chennai Metropolitan Water Supply and Sewerage Board. It sought assessment under Heading 98.01 of the Customs Tariff Act, 1975, read with the Project Import Regulations, 1986. Customs rejected the claim because the project contract was registered only after the purchase orders had been placed; the petitioner also sought revision of the Bills of Entry after clearance.

The contract was registered on 05.06.2025. Two Bills of Entry, both dated 13.08.2025, related to goods imported after registration; the other three consignments were imported before registration.

1. Whether goods imported after registration of the project contract could qualify for assessment under Heading 98.01, notwithstanding that the purchase orders preceded registration.

2. Whether the petitioner could seek post-clearance revision of the relevant Bills of Entry under Section 18A of the Customs Act, 1962, despite the restriction in Section 149.

Section 2(23) of the Customs Act, 1962, defines “import” as bringing goods into India from a place outside India, and Section 2(27) includes India’s territorial waters within India.

Relying on Garden Silk Mills Ltd. v. Union of India, (1999) 8 SCC 744, the Court stated that a purchase order is not itself importation; the date of importation is material.

Regulations 4 and 5 of the Project Import Regulations, 1986, require registration of the specific contract and an application for registration on or before importation; the contract must be registered before clearance for home consumption is permitted.

Section 149 generally governs amendment of documents and restricts amendment of a Bill of Entry after clearance, while Section 18A, as described by the Court, operates notwithstanding Section 149 and enables post-clearance revision subject to prescribed requirements.

The Court held that the respondents could not treat the date of a purchase order as the date of importation. The relevant question was whether each consignment was imported after registration of the project contract and before the order permitting clearance.

Since the two consignments covered by the Bills of Entry dated 13.08.2025 were imported after registration on 05.06.2025, they could qualify for Heading 98.01, subject to the remaining regulatory requirements; the three earlier consignments could not.

For the two eligible consignments, Section 18A allowed the petitioner to seek revision notwithstanding Section 149, but revision remained subject to statutory and prescribed conditions.

If revision was otherwise permissible, the respondents were to extend the Heading 98.01 benefit and process the differential-duty refund in accordance with law.

The challenge concerning the other three Bills of Entry was rejected; there was no order as to costs.