LexaceLexace Ask the AI ›
⚖️ Ask the AI about your situation:🚗 Car Accident💼 Work / Job🏠 Housing / Eviction👪 Family / Divorce📋 Contract Dispute💰 Money Owed

AGRICULTURAL AND PROCESSED FOOD PRODUCTS ETC versus OSWAL AGRO FURANE AND ORS.

Citation: [1996] SUPP. 2 S.C.R. 73 · Decided: 30-04-1996 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: J.S. VERMA, B.N. KIRPAL · Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed

cites 1 · see the full citation network in Lexace

Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this case

Judgment (excerpt)

AGRICULTURAL AND PROCESSED FOOD PRODUCTS ETC. 
A 
v. 
OSWAL AGRO FURANE AND ORS. 
APRIL 30, 1996 
[J.S. VERMA AND B.N. KIRPAL, JJ.] 
Imports and Exports (Control) Act 1947: 
Export Oriented Unit--100% exp01t of product-Other than those indi-
cated in industrial licence-Imposition of trade restrictions including fo:ation 
of minimum price for export-{fnit contended such restrictions not applicable 
to it in view of saving provisions of Clause 15(j)-Held : Clause 15(j) 
applicable only to those products indicated in industrial licence not saved 
under the Clause-Trade restrictions applicable in respect of these 
products-Fixing of minimum price held valid. 
Registration and Licensing of Industrial Undertakings Rules, 1952 : 
Rule 16. 
Export--Indust1ial licence-Variation or amendment of--Pennissible at 
B 
c 
D 
the instance of the undertaking-Export of product not indicated in original E 
licence-Subsequently the undertaking expressed willingness to export said 
product indicating amount of foreign exchange to be eame!f-Accordingly 
Licence amended making amendment a condition-Held : amendment was 
valid and the undertaking obliged to export said product pursuant thereto--In-
dustrie£ (Development and Regulation) Act, 1951. 
F 
Central Excise and Salt Act, 1944: Sections 3 and SA. 
100% Export Oriented Unit-Production of excisable goods-Sold 
within country instead of exporting them-No pennission obtained from 
authorities-Excise duty not paid-Non-payment of Excise duty not disclosed · G 
in writ petition filed before High Court-High Court by interim order pennitted 
unit to clear goods without payment of excise duty-Held : in absence of 
pemiission from authorities to sell goods within country, unit liable to pay full 
amount of excise duty-Since the unit, a commercial organisation, obtained 
unfair and undue advantage from High Court the amount due was a bank 
loan on which interest at 18% per annum was payable. 
H 
73 
74 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS [1996] SUPP. 2 S.C.R. 
A 
Constitution of India, 1950: · 
Altic/es 136 and 226--Re/ief--lnterest on amount due to Govem-
ment-bzcorrect order obtained from High Coult by company-Thereby no 
excise duty paid and amount invested in its business-Held : amount due to 
B be treated as bank loaJt-flence, while paying excise duty company liable to 
pay interest at bank rate. 
Articles 136 and 226-F.,xport of goods-At price less than minimum 
price by virtue of unwarranted interim order by High Coult-Conditional order 
passed by Supreme Court that company would make good the difference 
C between minimum price and actual price if export was in violation of 
law-Held : company obtained unfair and undue advantage as a result of 
interim order of High Coult-ft would be incumbent on Supreme Coult to 
inteifere under Article 136 and grant appropriate relief-Export qs· well as its 
price in violation of laW-Company liable to pay difference between minimum 
price and actual export price-Even thought if valid authorisation was issued 
D for export the company was liable to pay only 5% commission but it made 
export in violation of law and under conditional orders passed by Supreme 
Court, it could not be allowed to say it was not liable to pay difference. 
Articles 136 and 226--Process of CouTt-Abuse of-Suppression of 
E material fact-Writ petition filed by company before Delhi High 
Court-witlzout making any reference to its earlier petiti01z filed before Punjab 
and Haryrma High Court in respect of same matter-Statements in both writ 
petitions contrary to each other--Held: had company disclosed details of its 
earlier petiti01~ Delhi High Court would not have entertained the petition. 
F 
Inte!pretation of Statutes : 
G 
Saving provision-Merely preserved right or obligation that existed did 
not and could not confer any new or additional right--lt is different from 
exemption provision. 
The Government of India, Ministry of commerce issued a notifica-
tion whereby a scheme was formulated to facilitate setting up of 100% 
export oriented units. The respondents were granted industrial licence to 
manufacture Furfural and edible rice bran oil in a 100% export oriented 
project. This licence was issued subject to various conditions, one of which 
H was Condition No. (vi) which stated that the entire 100% production shall 
AGRICULTURAL AND PROCF.sSED FOOD POTS. v. OSWAL AGRO FURANE 
75 
be exported. The Government of India in exercise of its powers under A 
Section 3 of the Imports and Export

Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.