9911796707
TMI Blog2023 (6) TMI 862X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... accept the claim of the petitioner under the Merchandise Export from India Scheme (for short 'MEIS') and thereby, direct the respondents to grant benefit under the said Scheme. [2] Looking to the issues involved in the present petition, learned advocates appearing for the parties have jointly requested that this petition may be finally disposed of at the admission stage. [3] Hence, Rule. Learned advocate Mr.Hirak Shah waives service of notice of rule for and on behalf of respondent nos.1 to 3. [4] The brief facts leading to the present case are as under: Brief Facts:- 4.1 It is the case of the petitioner that the petitioner is a company involved in the business of manufacturing and supplying cranes. It is stated that on 05.10.2015, th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r that though the email was sent to the respondent no.2, no response was given by the respondent no.2 and thereby, the respondent no.2 did not allow the claim of the petitioner. The petitioner was also not given option to rectify the technical mistake by amendment as per the provisions of law. Therefore, the petitioner has preferred the present petition. [5] Heard learned advocate Ms.Natasha Sutaria for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel Mr.Hirak Shah for respondent nos.1 to 3. [6] Learned advocate for the petitioner mainly submitted that because of the technical error, the petitioner could not click 'YES' in the portal of the respondents and therefore, in the shipping bill itself it is specifically stated that "I/We SHALL CLAIM ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... issued to the respondents. [7] On the other hand, learned Standing Counsel for the respondent Nos.1 to 3, has vehemently opposed this petition. Learned Standing Counsel has referred the averments made in the Affidavit-in-reply filed on behalf of respondent Nos.1 to 3. Copy of the Affidavit-in-reply placed on record at page No.25 of the compilation. 7.1 It is submitted that the petitioner had not made any request for rectification/amendment immediately after submission of the shipping bills and only on 26.02.2018 for the first time, email was sent by the petitioner to the concerned respondent. It is further submitted that the facts of the present case are different from the facts of the case upon which the reliance has been placed by the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... exporters made representations before the concerned respondent authority and therefore, the concerned respondent issued Trade Notice No.24/2018 dated 21.02.2018. Trade Notice is reproduced hereinunder:- Government of India Ministry of Commerce & Industry Department of Commerce Directorate General of Foreign Trade Udyog Bhawan, New Delhi Trade Notice No. 24/2018 Dated : 21st February, 2018 To, 1. All Exporters/Members of Trade 2. All Regional Authorities of the Directorate General of Foreign Trade Subject: Information on details of shipping bills in cases where exporters who have inadvertently ticked "N" (for No) instead of "Y" (for Yes) in "Reward" column of shipping bills while filing the EDI shipping bills, but have dec ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ity Sd/- (Lokesh HD) Joint Director General of Foreign Trade (Issued from F.No.01/61/180/152/AM16/PC-3) [10] It further reveals from the record that after issuance of the said Trade Notice, within a period of five days only i.e. 26.10.2018, the petitioner submitted necessary details to the concerned respondent. The copy of the said email is placed on record at page No.22 of the compilation. [11] At this stage, this Court would like to refer the order dated 17.02.2021 passed by this Court in almost similar type of matter being Special Civil Application No.11038 of 2020. From the aforesaid order, it reveals that in the said case, similar type of contentions were raised on behalf of the respondents. Thereafter, this Court has ob ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... lacunae in the electronic system. 25. In view of the above, the present writ-application succeeds and is hereby allowed. The respondents nos.1 and 2 are directed to grant the benefits of the MEIS to the writ- applicant within a period of four weeks from the date of the receipt of this order." [12] Learned Standing Counsel for the respondents has tried to argue that the facts of the present case are different. Learned Counsel has referred paras 7, 8 and 16 of the aforesaid order passed by this Court. After referring to the same, it is submitted that in the said case, amendment was permitted and the concerned respondent issued an Amendment Certificate in the said case. Therefore, this Court passed the order in favour of the concerned pe ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
