TMI Blog2010 (7) TMI 326X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... issuance of a Writ of Mandamus to direct the 1st respondent to dispose of the main appeal pending in F. No. 11/225/05-06/FCA-1 on the file of the 1st Respondent without insisting upon any bank guarantee. 2. The facts which are necessary for the disposal of the Writ Petition are that the petitioner secured an order from U.A.E. for the export of 3000 numbers of school bags. Thereafter the petitioner approached the 2nd respondent for issuance of an advance license for import of goods necessary for the manufacture of the export goods namely school bags. The 2nd Respondent issued a quantity based advance licence dated 25-10-1994. As per the licence, the petitioner was permitted to import Nylon cloth with export obligation to export the f ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... equivalent to the customs duty on the imported material in addition to a personal penalty. As against such order, the petitioner preferred an appeal to the 1st respondent under Section 15 of the Foreign Trade (Regulation and Development) Act, 1992. The petitioner also filed an application to dispense with the pre-deposit which is required to be made in terms of the 2nd proviso to Section 15(1) of the Act. At that stage, the petitioner has filed the present writ petition for issuance of writ of mandamus for a direction to dispose of the appeal without insisting upon any bank guarantee. 6. When the matter is taken up today, the learned counsel for the petitioner filed an additional typed set of papers in which the interim order passe ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... before the 2nd respondent that they were unable to produce the proof of export obligation due to the delay by the customs authorities in endorsing the DEEC book and after repeated representations, the Deputy Commissioner of Customs, Grade-7 has made the necessary endorsement in the DEEC book on 25-10-1994 and copy of the same was produced along with the application for waiver to establish that they have fulfilled the export obligation. The plea raised by the petitioner in the waiver application though referred to by the 1st respondent in the interim order dated 8-5-2006 has not been considered. Learned Senior Standing Counsel appearing for the 1st Respondent would submit that the 1st respondent had taken note of the same and considered the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
