9911796707
TMI Blog1989 (7) TMI 184X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... eceipt was to be treated as the date of export and the said date being 5-6-1976 while the policy of cash assistance on the export of onions was withdrawn w.e.f. 1-6-1976. 2. The case as set out in the petition is that the petitioners exported various quantities of onions through the third respondent which was the recognised canalising agency between the period April to June 1976. As far as the-petitioners were concerned they had complied with all formalities pertaining to the said exports and were issued five authenticated copies of shipping bills bearing Nos. 021021,22,25,26 and 27 dated 22-5-1976. In respect of such exports bill of lading bearing No. BAN-1 dated 22-5-1976 was also issued evidencing the shipment of the said goods on or b ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... onions was withdrawn w.e.f. l-6-1976 and as such the petitioners were not entitled to the same since the date of the mate receipt was 5-6-1976. 3. Dissatisfied with the older of the second respondent, the petitioners filed an appeal which was also dismissed. The second appeal filed by the petitioners met with the same fate. The petitioners also filed an application for review on or about 20-9-1979 to the Review Committee, the Ministry of Commerce, Civil Supplies and Co-operation. The said petition for review was rejected on the ground that the date of export could not be treated earlier than 5-6-1976. 4. The only point for consideration in the petition is whether the date of export has to be taken as 5-6-1976 which is the date of the ma ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... thdrawn w.e.f. 1-6-1976 and as such the petitioners were not entitled to the cash assistance or import replenishment licences. The contention of the learned counsel for the petitioners is that the. petitioners are governed by the provision as it existed on the relevant date i.e. 22-5-1976, the amending provision could not be treated as having any retrospective effect. As against that, the case of the department in the counter affidavit as also in the arguments is that the bill of lading necessarily follows the mate receipt and as such it had to be taken that the bill of lading was ante-dated and had been obtained fraudulently and could not be accepted by the respondents. However, this contention of the learned counsel for the respondent can ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... facie evidence of the receipt by the carrier of the goods as described in it. It necessarily follows that the bill of lading can be issued even before actually putting the goods on board. Without there being any material on record, it is difficult for me to hold that a bill of lading cannot be issued till after the mate receipt is issued. In the circumstances, the petitioners, are entiltled to the benefit of provisions of paragraph 33(a) of the Import Trade Control Policy as it existed at the relevant time i.e. the date of export has to be determined in accordance with the date of the bill of lading and not the date of the mate receipt. It is, however, open to the respondents to consider the genuineness of the bill of lading and to find ou ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
