UNION OF INDIA Vs. CHOWGULE AND COMPANY LIMITED

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Union of India has filed these appeals against a common judgment/order of the High Court of Bombay, Panaji Bench, Goa dated 16th December, 1993 passed in Writ Petition Nos. 480 of 1993, 490 of 1993, 522 of 1993 and 521 of 1993 filed by the respondents who were the petitioners before the High Court. By the impugned judgment the High Court has quashed the orders passed by the authorities rejecting the claim of the respondents for grant of additional licence against the export orders. But because of the intervening circumstances, i.e., issuance of REP Circular No. 11 of 1993 dated 5th May, 1998 by the Direcrate General of Foreign Trade, instead of granting the additional licence the Union of India has been directed pay the respondents the premium amount of 20% in terms of the said Circular. Union of India was directed work out the amount payable subject the respondents producing the Bank Certificate in respect of the realisation of foreign exchange of export proceeds.

(2.) The facts which are common all the appeals being similar are taken from the appeal: Union of India v. Chowgule & Co. Ltd. and Ors. 2003 (85) ECC 726

(3.) Respondent is a limited company incorporated under the Companies Act, 1956. It is engaged, inter alia, in the export of processed iron ore of Goan origin. It is also recognised as a trading house. Under the import Export Policy for April 1988-March 1991 (hereinafter referred as the old policy) trading houses were eligible for the benefit inter alia of additional licences of defined value against the export of processed iron ore under the policy. Old policy was terminated and instead a new policy starting w.e.f. April 1990-March 1993 (for short the New Policy) was introduced. During the period 1.4.1989 31.3.1990 the respondents had exported processed iron ore of the value of Rupees 21,92, 15,711.69. On 4.6.1990 the company applied the Assistant Chief Controller of Imports & Exports for additional licence of a value of Rs. 2, 12,63,924/- against the said exports. The application was rejected by the Assistant Chief Controller of Imports & Exports on 24th September, 1990 on the ground that application for additional licence for the licensing year 1990-1991 could not be considered on the basis of the items appearing in Appendix 12 of the New Policy because there was no provision for grant of licence under the heading transitional arrangements in terms of the paragraph 222 of the New Policy. Respondents preferred an appeal which was dismissed on 21st January, 1991. Likewise second appeal was dismissed on 12th March, 1992. Review Petition filed by the respondents was also rejected on 9th June, 1993.