9911796707
|
Home
Issues: Interpretation of policy provisions regarding importation against a Letter of Credit opened before a specified date.
Analysis: The judgment involves a revision application where the petitioners contended that the Letter of Credit for importing goods was opened before the specified date, entitling them to certain benefits under the Import Policy. The key contention was that even though the price and quantity in the Letter of Credit were altered due to market conditions, the original commitment for import existed before the specified date. The Government analyzed the situation in light of the policy provisions and the facts presented. The Government considered the policy provision in Paragraph 209 of the AM-79 Policy, which allowed imports against Letters of Credit opened before a specific date, even for items listed in the banned list. The critical aspect was determining whether a firm commitment for import existed before the specified date and if a Letter of Credit was opened prior to that date. The Government noted that while the original Letter of Credit was opened before the specified date, subsequent amendments to price and quantity raised questions about the firm commitment before the cutoff date. The Government emphasized the importance of offer and acceptance in forming a contract. It was highlighted that the essential elements of a transaction are price, quantity, and shipment period. While market conditions may necessitate changes, the core terms of the transaction should remain intact for the original commitment to be valid. The Government observed that significant alterations to price and quantity post-opening of the Letter of Credit indicated a new agreement rather than a continuation of the original commitment. Ultimately, the Government held that the importation did not align with a commitment made before the specified date, leading to the rejection of the revision application. The decision was based on the understanding that the changes in the Letter of Credit were made for profit motives rather than legal or moral obligations. The confiscation order on the goods was upheld, emphasizing the importance of adherence to policy provisions and the integrity of commercial agreements.
|
