Home Case Index All Cases Customs Customs + HC Customs - 2016 (1) TMI HC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2016 (1) TMI 418 - HC - CustomsGrant of Duty Credit Scrips - DGFT issued the Duty Credit Scrips for ₹ 50 lakhs and ₹ 1crore only as against the petitioner’s claims of ₹ 90,42,165 and ₹ 4,59,94,671. - Constitutional validity of Notifications Nos. 43 and 44 dated 25.09.2013 - As per the said scheme an IEC holder would be entitled for a Duty Credit Scrip at the rate of 2% on the incremental growth achieved by it during the period 01.01.2013 to 31.03.2013 compared to the period from 01.01.2012 to 31.03.2012 on the FOB value of exports. - another scheme called Incremental Exports Incentivisation Scheme (IEIS) on annual basis has been introduced. Under this scheme, an IEC holder would be entitled for a Duty Credit Scrip at the rate of 2% on an incremental growth achieved by it during a current year compared to the previous year on the FOB value of the exports. Held that:- On a careful consideration of the FTP 2009-14 as well as the Schemes in question vide paragraphs 3.14.4 and 3.14.5 read with the amendment vide Notifications dated 25.09.2013, we do not find any substance in the contention of the petitioner that the impugned amendments are sought to be enforced by the respondents with retrospective operation. We agree with the submission of the learned ASG that the amendments vide Notifications No.43 and 44 dated 25.09.2013 are only clarificatory and in no way affect the rights accrued to the petitioner to claim the benefit of Duty Credit. Therefore, we do not find any substance in the contention that the amendment to paragraph 3.14.4 and 3.14.5 of FTP 2009-14 vide Notifications No.43 and 44 dated 25.09.2013 are unconstitutional. However, the petitioner’s claims ought not to have been rejected without assigning any reasons - Respondent No.2 (regional authority) directed to ensure that a speaking order is passed in terms of Clause (ii) of paragraph 3.14.4(c) and 3.14.5(c) of FTP 2009-14 regarding the claims made by the petitioner. - Decided partly in favor of appellant.
|