TMI Blog2019 (3) TMI 985X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... petitioner claimed duty scrip for ₹ 7,59,65,508.03 in the prescribed form ANF 3F. However, the EDI system, at that point of time, did not accept application for issuance of scrips for value above ₹ 1 crore - the judgment in JSW Steel Ltd. [2016 (1) TMI 957 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT] is applicable to the facts of the present case, where it was held that None can claim any benefit or incentive as an absolute right. However, a definite policy is enunciated in the present case. That policy extends an incentive for a demonstrated increase in exports. Its purpose is also clear, viz., to encourage more exports. The policy s terms must, therefore, receive an interpretation as would advance its stated purpose, viz., to promote and encourage ex ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... eel Ltd. (supra) whereby similar applications filed by the petitioners therein are allowed in its entirety. 5. In the Petition it is stated that the petitioner is a leading manufacturer and exporter of Off Highway tyres in India. The petitioner is exporting more than 85% of its products to more than 120 countries including most developed countries like USA, Canada, Germany, France, Italy, UK, Russia, Australia, New Zealand, Japan, Korea, etc. and at the same time serving both Original Equipment Manufacturers (OEM) and the replacement market in India and across the globe. In this Petition the petitioner has narrated the prestige associated with the said company and details regarding its excellent export performance. 6. Vide Notificatio ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... application for issuance of scrips for value above ₹ 1 crore. Accordingly, the petitioner made online application for issuance of duty credit scrip for ₹ 1 crore and also filed manual application dated 25/3/2015 to the Additional Director General of Foreign Trade, Mumbai respondent No.3 herein in the prescribed form ANF 3F along with original documents. By a representation dated 7th July, 2015 followed by a letter dated 13th July, 2015, the petitioner again pointed out that the system did not allow the petitioner to file the claim for ₹ 7.60 crores, as the system was accepting entitlement only for ₹ 1 crore. It was pointed out that the petitioner filed physical claim documents for ₹ 7.60 crores with DGFT on 2 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... DGFT Headquarters. The petitioner by its letter dated 26th April, 2018 addressed to Shri Dr. Ajay Sahai, the Director General CEO of Federation of Indian Export Organization (FIEO), New Delhi, requested him to take up the matter with the concerned Ministry as the issue is already settled by this Court as well as other High Courts. As the respondents did not issue authorization for the balance amount of ₹ 6,59,65,508/ , the petitioner has approached this Court contending that the impugned action of the respondents in restricting the duty credit scrip (authorization) under the IEIS for ₹ 1 crore and the purported denial/refusal to issue duty credit scrip for the balance amount of ₹ 6,59,65,508/ is arbitrary and unsustain ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
