2006 (12) TMI 14 - HC - Customs

Penalty- EXIM Policy- Petitioner is not entitled for any benefit because the export obligation was fulfilled only valuewise not weightwise Unable to show any procedural unresonableness and the petition is dismissed.

Summary

Issues:
Impugning dismissal of appeal against fiscal penalty imposed by Joint Director General of Foreign Trade for failure to meet export obligations within the specified time frame.

Analysis:
The petitioners were granted an advance license for import, with a condition to export a specific quantity of goods within a given period. Failure to meet the export obligation led to a series of notices and show cause proceedings. The petitioners failed to submit necessary documents to prove fulfillment of export obligations, resulting in a declaration of default and imposition of a fiscal penalty.

The petitioners contended that they had completed 100% of the obligation value-wise but failed to meet the obligation by weight as required by the terms of the license. Despite claiming to have fulfilled the obligation by value, the failure to meet the weight requirement led to the imposition of the penalty. The Adjudicating Officer imposed the penalty under the relevant provisions of the Foreign Trade Act due to the petitioners' failure to appear for a personal hearing and provide documents supporting complete fulfillment of the export obligation by weight.

The Appellate Tribunal upheld the penalty, emphasizing the petitioners' failure to provide the necessary documents proving fulfillment of the export obligation by weight. The petitioners raised concerns about the non-decision of the pre-dispensation of the penalty amount application, leading to a restoration application being filed. However, the appellate board refused to grant further opportunities considering the timeline of events and the lack of compliance with the export obligations.

The dismissal of the appeal was based on the failure to fulfill the export obligation by weight, despite arguments focusing on value-wise fulfillment. The court found no procedural unreasonableness in the orders of the Foreign Trade authorities and upheld the dismissal of the appeal. The writ petition was deemed without merit and subsequently dismissed, with no grounds for interference under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.

In conclusion, the judgment upheld the imposition of the fiscal penalty due to the petitioners' failure to meet the export obligations by weight as required by the terms of the license. Despite claims of value-wise fulfillment, the inability to provide supporting documents for weight-wise compliance led to the dismissal of the appeal and the writ petition.