LAWS(MPH)-1984-9-47

H PATEL AND COMPANY Vs. UNION OF INDIA

Decided On September 18, 1984
H Patel And Company Appellant
V/S
UNION OF INDIA Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioners are a partnership firm and are carrying on business of exporting diamonds. The petitioners are a recognised export house within the meaning of the relevant import policies.

(2.) The Controller of Imports and Exports issues two types of licences : (1) Advance Licences, and (2) Imprest Licences. An Advance Licence is a term where the import is allowed under the Duty Exemption Scheme, while in case of Imprest Licence, the import is allowed outside the Duty Exemption Scheme. The Replenishment Licences are issued for the purpose of replenishment of items of import against exports already made. The export houses have been given the facility of importing OGL items against replenishment licences without debit to the value of the licences. As far as advance licences and imprest licences are concerned, the same were specifically issued for the import of certain items meant for export. In the policy for the period AM 83 with regard to advance/imprest licences for export houses, it was provided that:

(3.) Relying on the representations contained in the policy, and in particular, upon paragraph 185(4) of the Policy for the period April to March 1983, the petitioners applied for an imprest licence and the same was granted for the CIF value of Rs. 2,44,97,242 against an FOB value of export of Rs. 3,76,88,066 for the import of uncut and unset diamonds. In accordance with this licence, the petitioners imported uncut and unset diamonds and also fulfilled their export obligation. The petitioners were given the redemption certificate by the Controller of Imports and Exports on March 9, 1984, Thereafter, in accordance with the policy, the petitioners applied for revalidation of the licence and also for the endorsement for the import of OGL items. The application was filed on June 8, 1984 and the respondents turned it down by communication dated June 20, 1984. The import licence was returned without the necessary endorsements and the reasons for the rejection of the application were: