LAWS(KAR)-2019-6-150

ADITYA BIRLA NUVO LTD Vs. UNION OF INDIA

Decided On June 28, 2019
ADITYA BIRLA NUVO LTD Appellant
V/S
UNION OF INDIA Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is the second round of litigation by the petitioner for a writ of certiorari to quash order No.14/322/2005-IT dated 08.07.2014 passed by respondent No.5 vide Annexure-A and for a writ of mandamus directing the respondents to condone the delay of the petitioner in fulfilling the export quota, due to force majeure conditions and also direct the respondents to refund the Bank Guarantee encashed by respondent No.3.

(2.) It is the case of the petitioner that they engaged inter alia in manufacture and export of garments to the United States of America, Canada and the European Union, in terms of the quota allotted to it by the Apparel Export Promotion Council under the Ministry of Textiles, Government of India. The petitioner has been duly completing their obligations in respect of the various quotas allotted to them. During the calendar year 2004 the petitioner was allotted certain quotas in terms of which the petitioner was required to manufacture and export the quantities of garments allotted to it. In terms of the policy, an exporter is required to utilize the quota by September of the year and for the balance quantities, if any, the exporter can get the quota revalidated on furnishing a bank guarantee for a sum arrived at on the basis of the quantity remaining to be exported and at the rate specified in the policy. Accordingly, in the month of September, 2004, the petitioner got revalidated certain quantities to be exported on execution of a bank guarantee for Rs.58,40,640/-.

(3.) Due to certain reasons beyond its control, the most important of them being the massive Tsunami disaster that took place on 24.12.2004, the petitioner could not export the required quantities of garments although the garments were ready for export. Due to Tsunami, the Quality Inspectors of the customers could not visit India in time for inspection of the garments. The further Tsunami warnings also created a situation of uncertainty. As a result, the petitioner achieved the exports only by mid February, 2005.