9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2019 (9) TMI 849 - HC - CustomsServed from India scheme - incentive for a brand which is created outside India - Petitioner has challenged the decision of the Policy Interpretation Committee holding that the Foreign Trade Policy did not intend to incentivize any brand which is created outside India - matter of judicial discipline - HELD THAT - Division Bench of this Court in SHRI. NAMAN HOTELS PRIVATE LTD., JUNIPER HOTELS PVT LTD, JOHNSON JOHNSON PVT. LTD., THYSSENKRUPP INDUSTRIAL SOLUTIONS (INDIA) PRIVATE LIMITED (ERSTWHILE KNOWN AS UHDE INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED) VERSUS THE UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS 2015 (9) TMI 564 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT is considered - It is not disputed that before the Division Bench the very issue sought to be raised in the present Petition was under consideration. The Division Bench considered the Foreign Trade Policy and the Served From India scheme. After considering the matter in detail the Division Bench dismissed the Writ Petitions filed by the Petitioners. The learned counsel for the Petitioner contends that the Supreme Court, noticing the divergent views expressed by this Court and the Delhi High Court, has issued a notice on 6 November 2017. As a matter of judicial discipline, petition dismissed.
Issues:
Challenge to interpretation of paragraph 3.12.1 of the FTP 2009-14 by Policy Interpretation Committee and Order dated 01.08.2019 based on the interpretation. Analysis: The Petitioner, a Private Limited Company operating hotels, challenged the decision of the Policy Interpretation Committee regarding the Foreign Trade Policy's stance on incentivizing brands created outside India. The Committee held that Indian brands incentivized should be unique, easily recognizable, and enhance the Indian image, using the term "Served from India" brand. The Petitioner sought to quash this decision and prevent the Respondents from relying on it or implementing the Order dated 01.08.2019, which was based on the said interpretation. The Petitioner cited a decision by the Division Bench of the High Court in previous writ petitions related to the same issue. The Division Bench had considered the Foreign Trade Policy and the 'Served From India' scheme, ultimately dismissing the writ petitions filed by the Petitioners. The Petitioner's counsel highlighted that the Supreme Court had taken notice of the conflicting views between the High Court and the Delhi High Court on the matter, issuing a notice on 6 November 2017. In line with judicial discipline and following the precedent set by the Division Bench's decision on 17 August 2015, the High Court dismissed the current Writ Petition. The order was made accordingly, upholding the decision of the Policy Interpretation Committee and the Order dated 01.08.2019 based on the interpretation of paragraph 3.12.1 of the FTP 2009-14.
|
