The Delhi High Court upheld the Prohibition of the export of non-basmati rice due to non-payment of export duty and non-compliance with conditions as per the notification.
The petitioner VI Exports India Private Limited prayed to issue a writ, order or direction like mandamus or any other appropriate writ thereby issuing necessary directions to the Respondent to permit the petitioner to export 11,000 MT’s of non-basmati white rice for which shipping bills had been filed by the petitioner and the rotation number of the vessel has also been generated, before 21:51:01 hours on 20.07.2023.
The Petitioner, who is an exporter of rice and other agricultural products, received an Order from its overseas buyer M/s Indi Sino Trade Pte Ltd for the sale of 40,000 MT of rice which was to be exported from Kandla Port in Gujarat. It was stated that in terms of the said order, the Petitioner purchased 28,000 MT of rice from its various vendors and started the process of packaging of rice and transportation to Kandla. It is stated that the Petitioner, thereafter, requested the Port Authority at Kandla to grant permission to the Petitioner to store the 28,000 MT of rice.
However, due to space constraints at the port, the port authorities permitted to store of only 11,000 MT of rice. The Petitioner stored about 11,000 MT of rice inside the port and the balance quantity of rice was stored at various private warehouses in Kandla. The Petitioner duly filed 28 Shipping Bills for export of 28,000 MT of rice at the customs portal between 10.07.2023 and 12.07.2023.
In the interregnum, a Notification bearing No.20/2023 dated 20.07.2023 was issued by the Department of Commerce, Government of India prohibiting the export of “Non-basmati white rice (semi-milled or wholly milled rice, whether or not polished or glazed: other)”. Since the effect of the said notification would be on all pending exports, certain exemptions were granted to the consignments of Non-basmati rice in the Notification bearing No.20/2023 dated 20.07.2023
A perusal of the notification, therefore, shows that the notification was brought in to impose an immediate ban on the export of Basmati rice and the permission to export basmati rice was only in certain circumstances. A perusal of the amendment shows that the time by which the details of the consignment had to be entered into the system was mentioned. A separate category was also introduced whereunder if the customs duty is paid before 21:57:01 hours on 20.07.2023, then the consignment could be permitted for export.
Since the Petitioner had only paid the export duty for 17 shipping bills before the stipulated time i.e., 21:57:01 hours on 20.07.2023 out of 28 shipping bills, the Petitioner was only permitted to export 17,000 MT of rice which is covered under 17 shipping bills and was not permitted to export the remaining 11,000 MT.
Aggrieved by the fact that the Petitioner has not been permitted to export the remaining 11,000 MT of rice, the instant writ petition has been filed by the Petitioner for a direction to the Respondent to permit the Petitioner to export 11,000 MT of Non-basmati rice for which shipping bills had been filed by the Petitioner and the rotation number had also been generated.
The Petitioner has not been able to fulfil any of the conditions under which it could have exported the rice in its entirety. The ship had not berthed before 20.07.2023. Loading had not started before 20.07.2023. 11,000 MT of rice which is sought to be exported had not entered the customs station for exportation before the issuance of Notification.
Justice Subramonium Prasad observed that the Petitioner has not filed any verifiable evidence of the date and time of stamping of these 11,000 MT of rice having entered the Customs station before 20.07.2023. The Petitioner only has valid shipping bills, vessel call number (VCN) and the customs rotation number. The Court dismissed the Writ Petition.
Subscribe Taxscan Premium to view the JudgmentSupport our journalism by subscribing to Taxscan premium. Follow us on Telegram for quick updates
