Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding


  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

2022 (10) TMI 1221

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... d 15.10.2007 - subsequent withdrawal of notification - case of the petitioners is that the abrupt change in the policy is arbitrary and highhanded, affecting the vested rights of the petitioners and as such requires to be set aside - HELD THAT:- The 2nd respondent having accepted, in principle, the requirement of protecting the persons who had already acted on the existing policy, could not have restricted the protection to only the three categories mentioned in the impugned notification. As can be seen in the present case, the petitioners in all the three cases, acting on the basis of the existing policy, had entered into contracts with third parties outside India and had also procured the broken rice necessary to execute such contracts, .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... notification was withdrawn and the export of rice as well as broken rice was permitted as the said commodity was shifted into the category Free under the export policy. The 2nd respondent has again issued a notification bearing No.31/2015- 2020, dated 08.09.2022 shifting the commodity broken rice answering the description in ITC (HS) code 1006 40 00 from the category of free to prohibited. This would mean that the export of broken rice from India was prohibited with effect from 09.09.2022. The said notification while prohibiting export of broken rice from 09.09.2022 had exempted the following consignments from the ambit of the notification for the period of 09.09.2022 till 15.09.2022 and the same was subsequently extended to 15.10.2022 .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... rs and as such requires to be set aside. The further case of the petitioners is that the abrupt ban of export of broken rice, has affected the ongoing contracts entered by the petitioners with third parties outside India and that the prohibition of export of broken rice would cause all the petitioners to default on their contracts which could lead to further damages on account of the provision of referring such disputes and claims by third parties to arbitration proceedings outside India. All the counsels would also reiterate that the 2nd respondent having taken into account the effect of an abrupt change in the policy had provided for relief to persons who had already acted on the basis of the existing policy. However, the 2nd responden .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... handed over 2130 metric tons of rice to the shipping agent and the same was stored at Container Freight Stations at three different places for transporting the same to China. The shipping bill check list produced by the petitioner on 30.08.2022 and the letters addressed by the shipping agent of the petitioner to the Manager, Gateway Cfs, Visakhapatnam dated 06.08.2022, the letters addressed to the Manager, Sravan Cfs-1 2, Visakhapatnam dated 19.07.2022 and the letter addressed to the Manager, VPL Integral Cfs, Visakhapatnam dated 17.07.2022, show that the entire quantity of 2130 metric tons of broken rice had been procured and stored in the ware houses even prior to 08.09.2022. Sri S. Srinivas Reddy, learned Senior Counsel has also re .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... missible for the petitioners. He further seeks time to file a detailed counter affidavit in the matter. The learned counsels for the petitioners would submit that the contracts entered into by them are time specific and any further delay in the matter, would cause the contracts to fall through, leaving the petitioners open to a claim of damages from third party buyers. Further the petitioners would not be able to sell the broken rice procured by them in the domestic market as there is no market for polished broken rice in the country as it is not an item of human consumption nor used for any ancillary industries such as poultry feed. The learned counsel for the petitioners would further submit that any sale by the petitioners of the b .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates