9911796707
TMI Blog2021 (3) TMI 1015X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ven for putting the petitioner under the Denied Entity List (DEL). The petitioner has admittedly given a reply to the show cause notice, dated 20.07.2020 issued by the respondents on 05.02.2020. The same has been admitted by the respondents. In the reply to the show cause notice dated 05.02.2020, the petitioner has contended that they have not violated the provisions of Foreign Trade (Regulations) Rules, 1993 in view of the fact that the imports were made by them, pursuant to interim stay order granted by this Court in respect of the notifications issued by the respondents. As seen from the reply dated 20.07.2020, the petitioner has raised several contentions. Under the impugned Communication, dated 05.10.2020, none of the objections ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Denied Entity List (DEL). 4. The petitioner has challenged the impugned Communication primarily on the ground of violation of principles of natural justice. 5. According to them, despite sending a detailed objection to the show cause notice issued by the respondents, the same has not been considered and without affording a fair hearing, the impugned order has been passed. Further, it is the case of the petitioner that imports were made by them when the notifications issued by the respondents were stayed by orders of this Court in WP No.15921 of 2018 etc., batch. Therefore, according to them, without considering the aforementioned factors and without giving any reasons, the impugned communication has been sent by the 1st responden ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... to grant or renew a[license, certificate scrip or any instrument bestowing financial or fiscal benefits]if-- (a) the applicant has contravened any law relating to customs or foreign exchange; (b) the application for the [license, certificate scrip or any instrument bestowing financial or fiscal benefits] does not substantially conform to any provision of these rules; (c) the application or any document used in support thereof contains any false or fraudulent or misleading statement [or where any person makes or abets or attempts to make any export or import in contravention of any provision of the Act or any rules and orders made thereunder or the Policy] ; (d) it has been decided by the Centr ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... g financial or fiscal benefits] for import, no foreign exchange is available for the purpose; (m) the application has been signed by a person other than a person duly authorised by the applicant under the provisions of the Policy; [(n) the applicant has attempted to obtain or has obtained or has erroneously claimed Terminal Excise Duty, duty drawback, cash assistance benefits admissible to Importer-exporter Code holder or any other similar benefits from the Central Government or any agency authorised by the Central Government in relation to exports made by him on the basis of any false, fraudulent or misleading statement or any document which is false or fabricated or tampered with.] (2) The refusal of a [licens ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... w cause notice, dated 20.07.2020 issued by the respondents on 05.02.2020. The same has been admitted by the respondents. In the reply to the show cause notice dated 05.02.2020, the petitioner has contended that they have not violated the provisions of Foreign Trade (Regulations) Rules, 1993 in view of the fact that the imports were made by them, pursuant to interim stay order granted by this Court in respect of the notifications issued by the respondents. As seen from the reply dated 20.07.2020, the petitioner has raised several contentions. However, under the impugned Communication, dated 05.10.2020, none of the objections raised by the petitioner has been considered by the 1st respondent. The impugned communication is a non speaking order ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
