9911796707
TMI Blog1989 (2) TMI 199X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ely a different matter. Appeal dismissed. - 3482 of 1987 - - - Dated:- 6-2-1989 - G.L. Oza and K.N. Saikia, JJ. REPRESENTED BY: S/Shri S.K. Dholakia, Senior Advocate, P.C. Kapur and R.C. Bhatia, Advocates with him, for the Appellant. S/Shri A. Subba Rao, C.V. Subba Rao and Smt. Sushma Suri, Advocates, for the Respondents. [Judgment per : K.N. Saikia, J.]. - This appeal by special leave is from the judgment of the High Court of Gujarat in Special Civil Application No. 1294 of 1977 under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. 2. The Government of India Ministry of Foreign Trade announced through public notice No. 196-ITC (PN)/69, dated 8th December, 1969 a scheme for registration of contracts involving deliveries exten ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... this rule is likely to affect an exporter adversely, Government would be prepared to consider the matter on merits. It was also stated in paragraph 5 that the registered exporter would be entitled to claim cash assistance as and when the exports are made against the registered contracts and the application would be submitted to the disbursing authority in accordance with the policy and procedure announced from time to time by that Ministry. By letter No. 12(4)72-EAC, dated 20th April, 1972 on the subject of Amendment No. 53 the cash assistance .scheme on export of engineering goods was modified to the effect that an additional cash assistance of 5% of the f.o.b. value will be allowed on all exports made to North American and South American ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of acceptance of the offer Date of acceptance of the contract with the bank (1) (2) (3) (4) 1. 29-1-1972 17-5-1972 30-5-1972 2A. 29-1-1972 20-6-1972 26-7-1972 2B. 31-8-1972 27-10-1972 13-11-1972 3. 28-4-1973 5-6-1973 15-6-1973 (Telex 31-5-1973) In respect of the exports made pursant to two of the aforesaid contracts, namely No. 1 and 2(A), the respondents paid to the appellant a cash assistance of Rs. 3,48,555 but refused to pay the claimed amount of Rs. 4,10,784.93P in respect of the exports made pursuant to the other two contracts and instead demanded refund of aforesaid ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... renegotiation on the ground of increase in prices of raw-materials, protection to registered contract was not available. 5. The appellants thereafter moved an application under Article 226 of the Constitution of India in the Gujarat High Court which partly allowed the petition restraining the respondents from enforcing the demand for the refund of the amount already paid by way of cash assistance and rejecting the appellant s claim in so far as the contracts entered into in the context of the offers made subsequent to April 1972 because the cash assistance declared as on April 1,1972 and thereafter was in terms made available upto a specific date. The exports under the two concerned contracts namely No. 2-B and 3 were admittedly made afte ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tracts with the banks was introduced. Relying on paragraph 3 of the 1970 scheme, he emphasises that it was the date of the Firm contract which was to be reckoned and not the date of export of the products. Relying on paragraph 6 of the scheme he submits that it envisaged contracts involving deliveries extending over a period of not less than 12 months and contracts for export were to be registered by the banks in the manner prescribed. As regard the Government s policy of assisting the exports for the purpose of augmenting foreign exchange earnings of the country he submits that the deprivation of cash assistance to the exporter who registered their contracts would defeat the very purpose of the scheme. 7. Mr. C.V. Subba Rao learned couns ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
