TMI Blog2018 (10) TMI 116X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ore, the scope of judicial review of the decisions of the PRC is limited. Unless the petitioner is able to establish that the decision of the PRC was perverse, arbitrary, capricious or unreasonable or otherwise contrary to the statutory framework, no interference with such decision would be permissible - It is, at once, clear that the petitioner had not set up a case of any unexpected hardship or any emergent situation that had precluded the petitioner from completing the imports. Essentially, the petitioner had sought extension of the Duty Free Import Authorization on the ground of commercial expediency. The PRC was of the view that since the petitioner had not set up a case of genuine hardship, it was not entitled to any relaxation in terms of Paragraph 2.58 of the FTP - This Court is unable to accept that the said decision is arbitrary, unreasonable or otherwise falls foul of Article 14 of the Constitution of India. Whether the petitioner had been afforded sufficient time to comply with the import obligations for completing the imports under the Duty Free Import Authorization? - Held that:- The petitioner had obtained an import authorization which remained valid for twenty-fo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tioner sought extension of the validity of the Duty Free Import Authorization. On 20th May 2014, the DGFT acceded to the petitioner s request and extended the validity of the Duty Free Import Authorization by a further period of six months, that is, till 30th September 2014. 6. The petitioner did not complete its imports within the extended period as well. The petitioner, thereafter, filed an application dated 08.12.2015 seeking further extension of six months (second revalidation). In its application, the petitioner contended that the global market was too volatile to procure material with a fixed price schedule and, therefore, the petitioner was required to wait for the right time to purchase the material because of inherent limitation of availability of resources. The petitioner also contested the policy of granting only one revalidation. He contended that the same does not hold good once an exporter has fulfilled its export obligation prior to the import. 7. The petitioner s application was considered and rejected by the PRC at a meeting held on 23.02.2016, principally, on the ground that the reasons provided by the petitioner only integrated commercial risk and not genui ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Relaxation Committee (PRC) 2.59 Personal Hearing by DGFT for Grievance Redressal (a) Government is committed to easy and speedy redressal of grievances from Trade and Industry. Paragraph 2.58 of FTP provides for relaxation of Policy and Procedures on grounds of genuine hardship and adverse impact on trade. If an importer/exporter is aggrieved by any decision taken by Policy Relaxation Committee (PRC), or a decision/order by any authority in the Directorate General of Foreign Trade, a specific request for Personal Hearing (PH) along with the prescribed application fee as per Appendix-2K has to be made to DGFT. DGFT may consider request for relaxation after consulting concerned Norms Committee, EPCG Committee or Policy Relaxation Committee (PRC) and the decision conveyed in pursuance to the personal hearing shall be final and binding. (b) The opportunity for Personal Hearing will not apply to a decision/order made in any proceeding, including an adjudication proceeding, whether at the original stage or at the appellate stage, under the relevant provisions of FT (D R) Act, 1992, as amended from time to time. 12. Paragraph 2.20 (a) of the Handbook of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... had contended that it was necessary to wait for the right time to book material . The petitioner had explained that there was inherent limitation on the availability of resources . The petitioner had further explained that small and medium enterprise cannot take advantage of favourable market situations and has to purchase quantities within the resources available with it . 18. It is, at once, clear that the petitioner had not set up a case of any unexpected hardship or any emergent situation that had precluded the petitioner from completing the imports. Essentially, the petitioner had sought extension of the Duty Free Import Authorization on the ground of commercial expediency. The PRC was of the view that since the petitioner had not set up a case of genuine hardship, it was not entitled to any relaxation in terms of Paragraph 2.58 of the FTP. 19. This Court is unable to accept that the said decision is arbitrary, unreasonable or otherwise falls foul of Article 14 of the Constitution of India. 20. The Division bench of this Court in NOCIL Ltd v. The Policy Relaxation Committee Ors. : 2017 (165) DRJ 170 had observed that the powers of the PRC, while making its ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
