DIMEXION Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE claim of the petitioners for grant of a certificate of Export House under the 1978-79 import-Export Policy have been rejected, it filed writ Petition No. 1501 of 1981 in the Delhi high Court. Several other petitions on behalf of traders whose similar claim had been rejected had been rejected had filed different petitions in different High Courts. One such petition viz. , writ Petition No. 1458 of 1979 was filed in this Court by N. Mehta and Co. This latter position was allowed on the 26th November 1982 and it was held that the view taken by the Department that the petitioners were not entitled to the certificates of export house on the ground that they had exported only diamonds and the exports were diversified and hence were not entitled to the certificate of Export House, was erroneous. Following the decision in Writ Petition No. 1458 of 1979, the petitioners' Writ Petition No. 1501 of 1981 in the Delhi High Court and various similar petitions were allowed. The Department carried the matter to the Supreme Court by filing Civil appeal No. 1423 of 1984, wherein the judgment and order dated 18th April, 1985 the appeal was dismissed and the view expressed in the various writ petitions was affirmed. Consequently, the petitioners were issued a certificate of Export House. Pursuant of the same, on the 20th August, 1985 the petitioners were issued an additional licence.

(2.) ON the 18th October, 1985, the Supreme Court passed an interim order in the case of Raj prakash chemicals whereunder importers were prohibited from clearing Butayl Acrylate falling under Appendix 3 Part A of the 1985-88 policy. On the 5th March 1986 the aforesaid Raj prakash Chemicals case was decided by the Supreme Court, wherein it was directed that wherever the goods were banned under the 1985-88 Policy, the same could not be imported. "specifically banned" included the goods covered under Appendix 3 Part A i. e. list of limited permissible items. Acting on the aforesaid judgment, the Chief Controller of Imports and Exports addressed his letter dated the 17th March, 1986 on one M/s. Vijay Kumar and Co. indicating that the goods covered under the canalised items will be permitted to be imported. Similarly, on the 14th May 1986 the Principal Collector of Customs and Central Excise addressed his letter to the federation of Imports and Exports that canalised items against additional licence was permissible and would be allowed to be cleared to the diamond exporters. Thus, the traders as also the department proceeded on the basis that under the aforesaid decision of the Supreme Court in the case of Raj Prakash Chemicals import of canalised items under the 1985-88 Policy was permissible.

(3.) THEN came the case of M/s. Indo-Afghan Chambers of Commerce which was decided by the supreme Court on the 14th May 1986, wherein it was held that the goods covered under appendix 2 Part B of the Import Export Policy 1985-88 were restricted items which were covered under the expression "specifically banned" and hence the same were not importable.