9911796707
TMI Blog2009 (9) TMI 372X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he Apparel Export Promotion Council, the Textile Commissioner and the second Appellate Committee directing the petitioners that they were not entitled to waiver of forfeiture amount for failure to comply with the terms of the quota obligation. 3. Prior to 1st January, 2005, the export of textiles and clothing was governed by the bilateral agreements entered into between the Government of India and United State of America, countries of European Union and Canada. In view of the said international agreements, policies were framed from time to time for allocation of quota amongst exporters to ensure the effective administration of the quota system and for optimizing the export revenue in the interest of the country. Under the Garments and Knit ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... der/non-utilization of quota has been upheld in Gokaldas Images Ltd. v. Union of India, 2006 (193) E.L.T. 264 (Del.) = 2007 (7) S.T.R. 347 (Del.) = 2005 (116) DLT 47 and Bhuvan Exports v. Union of India, W.P.(C) 1690/1982. 6. Counsel for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners were unable to fulfil or utilize the quota allocated to them on account of unscheduled and long power cuts in the city of Ludhiana. It is further stated that in view of the directions given by the Electricity Board, the petitioners were compelled not to operate the manufacturing units on one day of the week. It is also pointed out that in respect of quota subject matter in W.P.(C) 1411/2008, the petitioner therein had fulfilled the quota obligation to the exte ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r under-utilization of the quota is accepted. Forfeiture is imposed in view of the under-utilization or short-fall of the quota. The question whether any forfeiture should be imposed, even when the shortfall is marginal or slightly less than 90% is not for this Court to determine or decide. As per policy decision taken by the respondents, no forfeiture is to be affected in case of under-utilization by 10% or less. However, forfeiture is to be affected where there is under/non-utilization of quota above 10%. If the petitioner had made exports and utilize the quota to the extent of 90%, they would have not suffered forfeiture. Whenever cut of point/line is fixed, there can be marginal cases but this alone does not result in discrimination or ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... f the Textile Commissioner in the matter of a stay application or an appeal, may prefer an appeal against such decision within 45 days of the dispatch of the order of the 1st appellate authority to the 2nd appellate authority for a decision thereon." 10. The aforesaid clause did not give any power to the second Appellate Committee to enhance the quantum of forfeiture and increase the same. Clause 16(vii) quoted above gives right only to one party i.e. the exporter to file an appeal in case he was not satisfied with the decision of the first Appellate Committee. No right to appeal was given to Apparel Export Promotion Council or any third person to file an appeal before the second Appellate Committee. In fact, in the present case no appeal ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
