What are the penalties for violating foreign trade policy conditions?

Violating the conditions of India's Foreign Trade Policy is a statutory offence under the Foreign Trade (Development and Regulation) Act, 1992, with financial penalties of up to five times the value of the goods, mandatory confiscation of the goods, and the permanent cancellation of the Importer Exporter Code that is the foundation of every import and export business. Penalties under the Customs Act, 1962 layer on top of FTP penalties and operate simultaneously. An importer who violates FTP conditions faces enforcement from DGFT and Customs at the same time.

What are the penalties for violating FTP conditions?

The penalty framework for violating India's Foreign Trade Policy operates across two parallel statutory regimes: the Foreign Trade (Development and Regulation) Act, 1992 and the Customs Act, 1962. Both statutes apply independently to the same set of facts and both can impose consequences simultaneously. Customs and DGFT can both act on the same contravention, and investigations routinely result in proceedings under both Acts being initiated in parallel.

Under the FT(DR) Act, 1992, the primary penalty provision for importers is Section 9A. This section empowers the adjudicating authority designated under Section 11 of the Act to impose a penalty of up to five times the value of the goods on any person found to have contravened any provision of the Act, any Rule or Order made under it, or any condition of an export or import licence or other authorisation issued under the Act. The value of goods for this purpose is the CIF value, being the total value of the goods including cost, insurance, and freight up to the Indian port of entry. For a shipment of restricted goods worth Rs. 1 crore, the maximum penalty under Section 9A alone is Rs. 5 crore.

In addition to the financial penalty, the Section 11 adjudicating authority can order confiscation of the goods involved in the contravention. Confiscation means the goods vest in the Central Government. In some cases the adjudicating authority allows the importer to redeem the goods by paying a redemption fine in lieu of confiscation, but this is discretionary and is not available for absolute prohibitions. DGFT can also suspend or cancel the IEC under Section 8 of the FT(DR) Act. A suspended IEC shuts down all import and export activity across all product lines and all ports until the suspension is lifted.

Implications for businesses operating in India

For foreign exporters and manufacturers, the FTP penalty framework creates indirect but real commercial risk. If an Indian buyer's IEC is suspended following an FTP violation, the foreign exporter loses a customer, sometimes permanently, and must navigate the unwinding of any outstanding transactions or receivables with an entity that is legally prohibited from importing. Foreign manufacturers who have structured their India market strategy around a single distributor or importer face a concentrated risk: one FTP violation by their Indian partner can cut off their India market access entirely.

For Indian importers and traders, the financial penalty of up to five times CIF value, combined with the loss of the goods through confiscation and the ongoing cost of port detention while proceedings are pending, can destroy the economics of an entire year's import programme. Beyond the financial exposure on the specific consignment, an FTP adjudication that finds against an importer becomes part of the DGFT's record for that entity. Repeat violations result in IEC cancellation, and without an IEC, the business cannot legally conduct any import or export at all.

For Customs House Agents and freight forwarders, the FTP penalty regime creates professional liability exposure when they have been involved in the import transaction. A CHA who files a Bill of Entry containing a false declaration, whether about the goods' classification, the licensing status, the country of origin, or the declared value, faces proceedings under the Customs Act, 1962 for their role in the misdeclaration. A finding of professional misconduct or participation in a violation can result in suspension or cancellation of the CHA licence.

How FTP penalty proceedings work

FTP penalty proceedings under the FT(DR) Act are initiated by DGFT, typically through a Show Cause Notice issued to the importer by the DGFT Regional Authority. The Show Cause Notice identifies the alleged contravention, cites the relevant provision of the FTP and the Act, quantifies the value of the goods, and sets out the maximum penalty the authority proposes to consider. The noticee has a specified period, typically 30 days, to file a written response to the Show Cause Notice. After receiving the response, the adjudicating authority conducts a personal hearing at which the noticee or their legal representative can present arguments and evidence.

The adjudicating authority then issues an Order-in-Original determining whether a contravention occurred and, if so, the penalty, confiscation, and any other consequences. The Order-in-Original can be appealed to the DGFT at the appellate level and then to the Foreign Trade (DRA) Appellate Board and ultimately to the High Court. During the pendency of Customs proceedings, which run parallel, the goods remain under Customs hold and demurrage accrues throughout.

At the Customs level, goods imported without the required DGFT licence are treated as prohibited goods under Section 2(33) of the Customs Act and are liable to confiscation under Section 111. Personal penalties on the importer, the CHA, and any other person involved in the transaction are imposed under Section 112 of the Customs Act, 1962. Section 114A imposes a penalty equal to the duty evaded where there has been a short-payment of Customs duty as a result of the misdeclaration. All Customs duty demands carry interest under Section 28AA at 15 percent per annum.

Legality and risks

The FT(DR) Act, 1992 and the Customs Act, 1962 each carry their own legal consequences, and they compound rather than substitute for each other. An importer found by DGFT to have imported restricted goods without a licence pays a penalty under Section 9A of the FT (DR) Act and faces confiscation under Section 11. The same importer simultaneously faces a penalty under Section 112 of the Customs Act for rendering the goods liable to confiscation, a Customs duty demand under Section 28 for any duty short-paid, and interest under Section 28AA. If the circumstances indicate a deliberate attempt to evade, for example a pattern of importing the same restricted goods under a false Free code across multiple shipments, prosecution under Section 135 of the Customs Act, 1962 may be pursued, carrying imprisonment of up to seven years for offences involving goods valued above Rs. 20 lakh.

The IEC suspension and cancellation powers under Section 8 of the FT (DR) Act operate without any minimum threshold. DGFT can suspend an IEC on the grounds of a public interest determination without waiting for the completion of adjudication proceedings. A suspended IEC cannot be used for any import or export, and Customs systems interface with DGFT's IEC database in real time, so a suspension takes effect immediately at all Indian ports and ICDs.

Word of counsel

Importers are advised that the most underestimated impact of an FTP adjudication is not the financial penalty itself but the effect on the importer's ongoing business while the case is pending. From the moment goods are detained under an FTP investigation, every day at the port costs money through container demurrage, ground rent, and in the case of perishable goods, potential commercial loss of the goods themselves.

Have a question about a specific product or regulation? Speak to an expert at accessindiaplatform.com