Home Case Index All Cases Customs Customs + HC Customs - 2019 (11) TMI HC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2019 (11) TMI 1539 - HC - CustomsIssuance of Certificate of Origin - permission to export RS - HELD THAT - A bare perusal of the procedure published for obtaining export authorization, dated 25.10.2018, clearly reveals that an applicant has to file the Certificate of Origin along with his application. Until and unless the said certificate is filed along with the application, the permission cannot be granted - Admittedly, the petitioner has repeatedly represented to the respondent No.3 to grant the Certificate of Origin. But despite his representations, no action has been taken by the respondent No.3, so far. By letter dated 24.10.2019, the respondent No.4 had written to the respondent No.3 for seeking consent for sending a team from the Forest Department of Andhra Pradesh to visit and inspect the stock kept by the petitioner. Moreover, a request was made to keep the concerned Field Officers ready for extending necessary cooperation to the visiting team. However, despite the request made by the Principal Chief Conservator of Forest, Andhra Pradesh no reply has been given to the said letter. Therefore, until and unless the Officers of the Andhra Pradesh were to come and verify the legality of the stock kept by the petitioner, the Certificate of Origin cannot be issued. In order to resolve the difficulty being faced by the petitioner, this Court directs the respondent No.4 to send his team of officers for inspection to the State of Telangana on 02.12.2019. The respondent No.3 is directed to ensure that the concerned Field Officers are ready to receive the team from the State of Andhra Pradesh. The petitioner is directed to ensure that his stock is kept in such a way that it would be easy for the inspecting team to identify and verify the stock - Petition dismissed.
Issues:
1. Challenge to the legality of communication directing information submission and inspection. 2. Allocation and storage of Red Sanders wood by petitioner. 3. Export regulations and procedures under CITES and Indian authorities. 4. Delay in issuing Certificate of Origin and inspection of stock. 5. Discrepancy in permissions for exporting Red Sanders wood as logs or Value Added Products. Issue 1: The petitioner challenged a communication from the Principal Chief Conservator of Forests, Telangana, directing the submission of information in a prescribed proforma, arranging wood logs for inspection, and providing copies of transit permits. The petitioner contended that the communication was illegal. Issue 2: The petitioner, engaged in purchasing Red Sanders (RS) from auctions and exporting it, stored allotted stock in Toopranpet Village, Yadadri-Bhuvanagiri District. The petitioner claimed to have a valid license under the Telangana Red Sanders Wood Possession Rules, 1989. Issue 3: The petitioner highlighted regulations governing RS export under the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES) and procedures set by the Director General of Foreign Trade, Ministry of Commerce and Industry, for obtaining export authorization. Issue 4: The delay in issuing the Certificate of Origin by the Forest Department despite repeated requests was a crucial concern. The petitioner emphasized the necessity of inspection before the certificate could be issued, as per Ministry of Environment guidelines. Issue 5: The dispute arose regarding the form in which RS could be exported, whether as logs or Value Added Products (VAP). The petitioner argued that this decision fell under the purview of the Central Government, not the State Forest Departments of Telangana or Andhra Pradesh. The judgment directed the inspection of the petitioner's stock by Andhra Pradesh Forest Department officers to facilitate the issuance of the Certificate of Origin. The Court mandated a hearing for the petitioner before deciding on the certificate's issuance, ensuring compliance by both Telangana and Andhra Pradesh authorities by a specified deadline. The judgment resolved the petitioner's challenges and disposed of the writ petition with no costs awarded.
|