TMI Blog1999 (8) TMI 291X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ss of exporting hand-knotted carpets of staple/rayon synthetic yarn, silk and other categories. Earlier it enjoyed the status of Export House which was upgraded to the status of Trading House with effect from 1st April, 1989. It continued to enjoy the same status of Trading House up to the material time. According to the Import-Export Policy effective from 1st April, 1992 to 31st March, 1997, the status of Export House, Trading House, Star Trading House was granted to the exporters on the basis of their average Annual Net Foreign Exchange earnings during the three preceding years. According to the said Policy the Export Houses, Trading Houses and Star Trading Houses were entitled to Special Import Licence for such value or bearing such portion to the NFE earned during the previous licensing year as shall be fixed by a Scheme to be notified under the Policy for the particular year. As per Public Notice No. 64/(PN)/92-97 dated 21st October, 1992 the Scheme was set out for the licensing year AM-93 for grant of SILs to various categories of exporters. For Trading Houses the maximum value of SILs was fixed at 75% of the NFE earned in the previous licensing year. Even prior to the said ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... petitioner to have the Trading House Certificate endorsed from the Director General of Foreign Trading so as to enable the petitioner to claim SIL on NFE basis. The petitioner s revised application was found to be incomplete in this respect and the petitioner was called upon to complete the same. Vide its letter dated 29th April, 1994, the petitioner submitted a photo copy of the Trading House Certificate duly endorsed by the Director General of Foreign Trade. The grievance of the petitioner in the present writ petition is that in spite of having submitted the revised application for issuance of SIL on the basis of NFE, the respondent has issued SIL to the petitioner only on the basis of FOB for Rs. 56,39,000/- instead of the NFE basis according to which it would come to Rs. 1,23,52,000/-. This has resulted in a loss to the petitioner to the extent of Rs. 53,13,000/-, the petitioner has requested the respondent vide its letter dated 4th October, 1994 for carrying .out the necessary correction which was, however, declined by the respondent. The petitioner has challenged the decision of the respondent by way of the present writ petition. 5. It is not in dispute that the petitioner ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Chartered Accountants of India. (3) You are also informed as per P. Notice No. 179 on NFE basis application cannot be considered because you have not endorsed on the Export House Certificate from DGFT Office. Your reply should reach this office within 30 days from the date of issue of this letter, failing which your case will be treated as finally closed. Yours faithfully, (H.K. Sharma) CONTROLLER OF IMPORTS AND EXPORTS FOR JT. DIRECTOR GENERAL OF FOREIGN TRADE 7. This letter, shows that the respondent was processing the application of the petitioner for SIL on the basis of revised criteria and it was not the stand of respondents that the petitioner was not entitled to exercise its option under the alternative route provided by the public notice dated 9th December, 1993. 8. Learned Counsel for the petitioner submitted that the case of the petitioner for grant of SIL on the basis of NFE earned during the previous year is fully covered under the revised policy declared as per public notice issued on 9th December, 1993 and the refusal of the respondents to grant SIL on that basis to the petitioner is wholly arbitrary, illegal and unjustified. The Counsel has particu ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 4. This is clear from respondents letter dated 9th April, 1994 wherein certain deficiencies in the fresh application of the petitioner were pointed out. The petitioner was called upon to comply with the said letter and remove the deficiencies within thirty days from the date of issue of the letter. The letter further stated that if the petitioner failed to do so, its case would be treated as closed. From this letter also it is clear that there was no move on the part of respondents to disqualify the petitioner for the NFE route or reject the application of the petitioner for grant of SIL on NFE basis as per the revised policy dated 9th December, 1993. The petitioner removed whatever deficiencies were pointed out by the respondents in their letter dated 9th April, 1994. In the rejection letter also the respondents did not disclose any ground for the rejection. The letter of rejection is totally silent on the reasons for declining to issue the licence to the petitioner on NFE basis. 10. In the above facts and circumstances of the case we are unable to accept the stand of the respondents that the petitioner was not entitled to exercise the option under the revised policy declared v ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
