LexS.B. INTERNATIONAL LTD. ETC. versus ASSTT. DIRECTOR GENERAL OF F.T. AND ORS. ETC.
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
A S.B. INTERNATIONAL LTD. ETC. v. ASSTT. DIRECTOR GENERAL OF F.T. AND ORS. ETC. JANUARY 24, 1996 B [B.P. JEEVAN REDDY AND B.N. KIRPAL, JJ.] Export and Import (Control) Act, 1947 S. 3-Export and Import Policy (1-4-1992 and 31.3.1997}-Duty Ex- C emption Scheme-Exporters permitted import of Duty free raw material etc. for purpose of export production subject to value based advance licences or quantity based advance licences--Company making applications for advance licences before 25.9.1992--Value addition norms enhanced w.ef 25.9.1992-- Company claiming advance licences in accordance with norms as in force prior to 25.9.1992---Held, mere making of an application for advance licence D ·does not create any right in applicant since he has no pre-existing right to such licence-No vested right accrues to applicant for issuance of advance licence on the basis of norm prevalent on the date of application-It is the tJeJe of the licence that is relevant and not the date of application-Value addition norm in vogue on date of grant of licence shall govern the licence-Grant of E Licence is neither a mechanical exercise nor a formality-Applications for grant of advance licences to be disposed of within reasonable time with due expedition. Doctrine of promissory estoppel-Applicability of F The Government of India, with a view to encourage exports, issued the "Export and Import Policy (lst April, 1992 and 31st March 1997) introducing "Duty Exemption Scheme" whereunder imports of duty free raw materials etc. required for the purpose of export production could be permitted "subject to the fulfilment of a time bound export obligation and G value addition norms as would be specified". Advance licence for the purpose could be based on either value or quantity and an exporter could apply either for a value based advance licence or a quantity based advance licence. The appellant (in Civil Appeal No. 2379/96), an exporter of marine H products, entered into contracts with foreign buyers and accordingly made 910 .-( S.B. INTERNATIONAL LID. v. ASSTI. DIRECTOR GEN. OFF.T. 911 five applications between 29th May 1992 and 15th September 1992 for A advance licences. On 25.9.1992 the value addition norm was enhanced to 1900 from 1000 per cent; and licences were issued according to the en- hanced value addition norm. The appellant-company first represented to the Government against the enhanced value addition norm, and later filed a writ petition before the High Court on the ground that since the appel- B Ian! had applied for licences prior to September, 25, 1992, its applications ought to be governed by value addition norin in force prior to 25.9.1992 . .. The Single Judge of the High Court allowed the writ petition. In the Letters ~ Patent Appeal filed by the Government, the Division Bench of the High Court held that the appellant would be entitled to advance licences accord- ing to pre-revised norm with respect to the actual exports effected by it c before 25.9.1992. Aggrieved, the Company as well as the Government filed the appeals. It was contended on behalf of the Company that it was entitled to advance licences in accordance with the policy in vogue on the date of D application because (i) the Export and the Import Policy being statutory in nature a right accrued to the Company to obtain the licences in accordance with the policy in vogue on the date of application therefor; and (ii) issuance of licences was delayed by the authorities and they could .....,,, not take advantage of their own wrong and apply the revised norms to the prejudice of the Company. A plea of promissory estoppel was also raised E on behalf of the Company. Dismissing the appeal of the Company and allowing that of the Government, this Court F HELD: 1.1. Mere making of an application for advance licence does not create any right in the applicant since he has no pre-existing right to such licence. His right is only that given by the policy. Under the "Duty Exemption Scheme' one has to ask for an import licence promising to export goods of a particular value within a particular time. In view of the G A Scheme and the context a vested right does not accrue to an applicant lbr ' . . issuance of advance licence on the basis of norm obtaining on the date of -t " application. (918-C-D, G] 1.2. It is the date of licence that is relevant and not the date of application therefor. It is obvious that the value
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.