9911796707
|
Home
Issues:
Challenge to Circular No. 19/92-97 dated 17th December 1992 and refusal to release raw silk imported under REP Licences/Exim Scrips. Analysis: The petitioners challenged Circular No. 19/92-97 dated 17th December 1992 and the refusal of authorities to release raw silk imported under REP Licences/Exim Scrips. The petitioners argued that they had a vested right to import goods under the old Policy and could not be deprived of this right without an amendment. They contended that the impugned Circular was unreasonable, as it made their licenses ineffective without proper grounds. Additionally, they invoked the principle of promissory estoppel, claiming authorities had assured them of importing raw silk freely under the licenses. The petitioners also argued that the Circular issued by the Director General of Foreign Trade lacked authority under the Foreign Trade (Development and Regulation) Act, 1992. Another case challenged the impugned Circular, leading to an appeal where 80% of goods were directed to be released upon payment of duty and furnishing of bonds. The judgment upheld the Circular's validity but restricted its operation to shipments made after the Circular's date. The Court, considering the circumstances, granted interim relief to the petitioners similar to the previous case. The Court emphasized the need to protect parties who acted based on the prevailing situation until the Circular was known. Consequently, the respondents were directed to release 80% of the goods covered by the licenses upon payment of duty and bond, retaining 20% in a bonded warehouse until final disposal of the matter. The Court's decision aimed to provide interim relief to the petitioners, aligning with previous judgments and considering the circumstances surrounding the Circular's issuance and impact on the parties involved. The Court emphasized the need to protect the rights of parties who acted based on the information available until the Circular was made known. The judgment highlighted the importance of upholding vested rights, reasonable grounds for policy changes, and adherence to legal principles in trade matters.
|
