9911796707
|
Home
Issues:
Interpretation of duty free licences validity period, power of Director General of Foreign Trade to clarify procedures, validity of circular dated 19.4.94, impact of interim orders on revenue safeguards. Analysis: The appeal was against an interlocutory order by the Delhi High Court staying the operation of a circular related to the transferability of a duty free licence. The licence was initially granted to Tata Iron and Steel Company, then transferred to M/s. Ferro Alloys Limited and subsequently to M/s. Mohan Ferro Alloys Private Limited, who sold it to the respondent. Customs authorities objected to the import made beyond six months from the date of endorsement of transferability. The High Court granted interim orders in favor of the respondent. The appellant argued that the circular clarified the validity period of duty free licences, but the High Court erred in staying it unconditionally. The Director General of Foreign Trade's power to clarify procedures was questioned, as the circular was not issued through a Public Notice, as required for amendments. The Court held that the circular attempted to amend the policy by changing "date of transfer" to "date of endorsement," which should have been done through a Public Notice. An amended procedure was issued later, but it did not apply to imports before that date. The Court emphasized the need for revenue safeguards in interim orders, as the possibility of the petition being dismissed cannot be ruled out. While dismissing the appeal, the Court highlighted the importance of ensuring safeguards for the Revenue in such cases. The writ petition was withdrawn from the High Court and allowed in the same terms as the appeal.
|
