9911796707
TMI Blog2003 (1) TMI 114X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... cannot be accepted. The application for the additional licence could be made only after the end of the fiscal year, as only thereafter the export house could know its entitlement. The High Court was, therefore, right in holding that the interpretation put by the authorities on the new policy in declining the claim of the respondents for the grant of additional licence was unacceptable. Under the new policy as well, the export houses/trading houses would remain entitled to the additional licence for the exports made during the period when the old policy was in force but subject to the condition that they would be allowed to import against the additional licence such items which are governed by the policy in force at the time of the import of the goods. Appeal dismissed. - 2185-2188 of 1994 - - - Dated:- 24-1-2003 - Syed Shah Mohammed Quadri and Ashok Bhan, JJ. [Judgment per : Ashok Bhan, J]. - Union of India has filed these appeals against a common judgment/order of the High Court of Bombay, Panaji Bench, Goa dated 16th December, 1993 passed in Writ Petition Nos. 480 of 1993, 490 of 1993, 522 of 1993 and 521 of 1993 filed by the respondents who were the petitioners bef ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t of India , Ministry of Commerce, Directorate General of Foreign Trade, Udyog Bhavan, New Delhi issued REP Circular No. 11/93, dated 5th May, 1993 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Circular 11 of 93') providing therein : "(b) Where the applications for issue of Exim Scrips/REP etc. licences are pending in respect of exports made and export proceeds realised there against prior to 1-3-92, the 20% premium will be straightaway paid, instead of issuing the licences, provided that licensing authority after processing the application and determining the eligibility for issue of licences is satisfied that the applicant is eligible for grant of Exim Scrips/REP etc licences." 5.On 14th July, 1993 respondents lodged its claim for 20% premium instead of additional licence for the licensing year April-March 1991 against exports of processed iron ore in the preceding licensing year April-March 1990. The claim of the company was rejected by the Deputy Director General of Foreign Trade, Panaji vide letter dated 1st September, 1993 on the ground that mineral and ores appearing in Appendix 12 of the policy book 1990-1993 were ineligible for additional licence. 6.Aggrieved against the aforesai ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... there was no application from the party pending for entitlement of additional licence as their application for additional licence was rejected. It was denied that their action in rejecting the application of the respondents for the grant of additional licence was contrary to law or null and void or in excess of jurisdiction. That the claim for additional licence in subsequent year was ineligible under the new policy although that might have been available under the old policy, which, however, ceased to exist after 31st March, 1990. Claim of respondents/writ petitioners that they had acquired any vested right to get an additional licence by virtue of exports made during the year 1989-1990 was denied. That the amendment made in the policy was valid and the consequences flowing thereof were in the public interest and therefore not opened to challenge. Circumstances which necessitated the amendment in public interest were set out. According to the appellants the export incentive was subject to changes from time to time during the policy period. A change when it was brought in the policy after 30th March 1990 could thus be made and was binding upon the parties and that the said amendmen ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nce under the old policy stand debarred from claiming the said additional licence because of the new import export policy which came into force from 1st April, 1990 and further the applicability of the Circular 11 of 93, dated 5th May, 1993 and the effect thereof. 12.Before addressing on the controversy, the salient features of the old import export policy effective for April 1988-March 1991, which was terminated on 30th March, 1990 and was replaced by the new import export policy April 1990-March, 1993 may be set out. Paragraph 211 of the old policy sets out the objectives of the scheme for registration of export houses and trading houses. It states that it is to grant recognition and facilities to a select band of efficient registered exporters who would develop a strong marketing capability and that it is expected that they would operate as highly specialized and dynamic institutions with a strong marketing infrastructure and act as an important instrument for export growth. Paragraph 212 provides that the eligibility for grant of Trading Houses/Export Houses certificate shall be determined on the basis of the net foreign exchange earnings from the exports actually made during ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... licences on the basis of admissible exports made in the preceding licensing year and the value of the licence will be calculated at the rate of 10% NFE earnings on the total eligible exports made in the preceding licensing year. Paragraph 222 deals with transitional arrangements and the same reads as under : "222. Where the applications from Export Houses/Trading Houses for Additional Licences for any of the preceding licensing year, have not been disposed of by the end of the licensing year, licences will be issued as per the relevant Policy provisions prevailing during the period to which the Additional Licences relate, subject to the condition that the permissibility of the items allowed for import against such licences will be governed by the relevant provisions of the Import Policy in force, at the time of their actual import." 14.Coming to the point raised it is to be noticed that paragraph 215 of the old policy is clear and provides that eligibility to the additional licence was to be determined on the basis of the admissible exports made in the preceding licensing year. Paragraph 222 of the new policy which has been extracted above provides that where the applications f ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of the respondents for the grant of additional licence was unacceptable. Under the new policy as well, the export houses/trading houses would remain entitled to the additional licence for the exports made during the period when the old policy was in force but subject to the condition that they would be allowed to import against the additional licence such items which are governed by the policy in force at the time of the import of the goods. 15.For the reasons stated above, we do not find any infirmity in the orders passed by the High Court in quashing the orders passed by the authorities rejecting the claim of the respondents for grant of additional licence. 16.Similarly, we do not find any infirmity in the orders passed by the High Courts in the issuance of writ of mandamus directing the Union of India to forthwith pay to the respondents the premium of 20% instead of issuing the additional licence in terms of the Circular 11 of 93. Circular 11 of 93 provides that where application for grant of additional licence are pending in respect of the exports made and export proceeds relating to the period prior to 1-3-1992 then instead of issuing the licences, the 20% premium shall b ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
