9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (5) TMI 1352X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s rejected. 2. The Petitioner/Company was engaged in the manufacture and sale of power supply systems of Ground Radar and Digital Ground Support Equipment. The petitioner is also offering its products and services to various Civil, Military and Aviation Industries. The petitioner has indigenized most of the systems previously being imported by the agencies, such as Defence Research and Development Organization (DRDO) and various defence Navartana Public Sector Enterprises. Till 31.03.2015, the Government of India, Ministry of Commerce, was operating inter-alia an Export Incentive Scheme, called as Focus Product Scheme (hereinafter referred to as 'the FPS Scheme' for short). The objective of the said scheme is laid down in Para 3.15 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... delivery of the supplies from the petitioner/Company at a Free Trade Warehousing Unit located at Sri City, Andhra Pradesh. In terms of Rule 18(5) of the Special Economic Zone Rules, 2006, the said unites are permitted to hold goods on account of foreign suppliers. The petitioner consigned the remaining three batches of shipment and completed the supplies. The said supplies were made as usual against export document, such as Bills of Export, Export Invoices and also made the payment in freely convertible foreign currency, which were also duly received by the petitioner. The product supplies were also notified products and eligible for the FPS and MEIS Scheme incentives. Therefore, the petitioner applied for the same by six applications clai ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 79) E.L.T.59 (Mad) and the relevant portion is extracted hereunder:- "17. The question of eligibility to the Scheme is fundamental to the prayer sought by the petitioner. Para 3.06 of the Scheme sets out seven categories of transactions/entities that would be ineligible for the benefits of MEIS. I have extracted the same at pargraph 5 of this order and do not repeat it again for the sake of brevity. 18. The first is, supplies effected by a Domestic Tariff Area (DTA) to a unit situated in a Special Economic Zone (SEZ), the second, export of imported goods covered under paragraph 2.46 of the Free Trade Policy, third, exports through trans-shipment, i.e,. exports originating from elsewhere and routed to another destination through India, f ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nd when the destination is decided, DHL is intimated of the same and the consignments shipped to that destination. 23. The exports in this case have already taken place at the point when the petitioner executes the relevant documents and the consignments are stored in the FTWZ, awaiting confirmation of the destination. This would avoid the circuitous route of shipment to UTEXAM at Ireland, and then onward to a final destination accompanied by multiple transportation costs and logistical complications. The role of DHL in this transaction is that of a warehouse and nothing more. The concept of 'ship to' and 'bill to', as used in this case, has been recognised under the GST regime, as commercial compulsions dictate, that transactions are to ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... h representation about its claim for the benefit of paragraph 3.06 of the FTP to the respondent no. 3 - the Director General of Foreign Trade who would consider the same and pass appropriate order thereon. This it would do as expeditiously as possible and preferably within 12 weeks from the date this order is uploaded on the High Court website. 11. The four impugned orders dated 25 October, 2017 are also set aside. It is only after the Director General of Foreign Trade rules on the appropriate interpretation of paragraph 3.06 of the FPT, the Joint Director General of Foreign Trade would take up the petitioner's application and dispose it of in accordance with law as expeditiously as possible and preferably with in a period of six week ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... pace (India) Pvt. Ltd., The mere description or misdescription in the shipping bill for whatever compelling reasons, does not change the actual factum as to who actually exported the goods and received consideration for the same. 21. The documents, which have been placed on record, leave no manner of doubt that the case of the Petitioner is clearly covered by the FTP, which has been extracted above. None of the exclusionary clauses would be applicable. The Petitioner was rightly issued the MEIS scrips. However, due to inexplicable reasons, the same was sought to be cancelled leading this long protracted litigation between the parties. The cancellation of MEIS scrips was done on 14th July, 2021 leading to the show cause notice proceedings, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
