9911796707
TMI Blog1983 (9) TMI 186X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... f India, the petitioner is challenging the legality of the order dated October 19, 1978 passed by the Joint Chief Controller of Imports and Exports in exercise of the appellate jurisdiction, and the order passed by the Chief Controller of Imports and Exports in revisional jurisdiction and communicated to the petitioner by letter dated March 30, 1979. 2. The petitioner is carrying on business in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ota percentage. In other words, an established importer of arms and ammunition is entitled to a quota licence of the value computed at 5% of the sum mentioned in the quota certificate held by such established importer. The petitioner firm holds the quota licence certificate bearing No. 114921, dated January 17, 1957 for the sum of Rs. 3,64,393 in respect of cartridge cases filled and empty. The fi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... es and the appeals were dismissed by an order dated October 19, 1978. The only ground given for rejection of the appeal was that there is no provision for established imports in the AM-79 Policy Book and reliance was placed on para 199 of Policy Book of AM-79. The revisional authority has confirmed the order by giving an additional reason that arms and ammunition is canalised through S.T.C. vide S ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... y has not passed any order on such applications till April 1, 1978. In the present case, the licensing authority granted the licence on March 6, 1978, but with 25% cut. Paragraph 199 of Policy Book AM-79 has no application whatsoever to the facts of the case as the licences were in fact granted prior to April 1, 1978. In my judgment, the reliance by the appellate authority and the revisional autho ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... f 25% of the entitlement. In case the item is banned, in accordance with the policy in existence at the relevant time, then naturally the petitioner would not be entitled to import the banned item, but the mere fact that the item is canalised would not deprive the petitioner from claiming; the advantage of the entitlement under the policy of 1977-78. In my judgment, the petitioner is entitled to t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
