In a recent decision the Delhi High Court ruled that there is no permission to purchase raw material from open market for exports when advance authorization is issued to allow duty free import.
The Petitioners have initially came up to the Court to allow them to complete their obligation of manufacturing and exporting copper wire by purchasing additional copper of the same grade from the open market and also seeking advance authorization license which had been issued to the Petitioner by filing W.P.(C) 3686/2021 stating that the Petitioners could not complete their export obligation due to COVID-19 pandemic.
The said writ petition was disposed of vide Order dated 23.03.2021 permitting the Petitioner to make a representation before the DGFT and a direction was given to the Respondent/DGFT to dispose of the representation within a period of 45 days.
Pending the writ petition, the representations given by the Petitioners were disposed of by an Order dated 23.06.2021. Consequent to the dismissalof the representations, the Petitioners filed an application for amending the writ petition by which the prayer to challenge the Order dated 23.06.2021 passed by the DGFT was included.
A Single Judge Bench of Justice Subramonium Prasad observed that “A perusal of the abovementioned order shows that the request of the Petitioner to fill up the shortage of raw material by purchasing the same from the domestic market, the same has been rejected by the Department placing reliance on Para 4.03 of the Foreign Trade Policy 2015-20. Since the Foreign Trade Policy specifically insists that in case advance authorization is issued to allow duty free import which is physically incorporated in the export product, the request to allow the Petitioner to purchase the raw material from open market for these exports could not be permitted.”
“A perusal of the Order challenged in the present Writ Petition indicates that the DGFT has given a proper opportunity of hearing to the other sides and, therefore, this Court is of the opinion that the decision making process is fair. Further, even on merits, the learned Counsel for the Petitioner has not been able to establish as to why the Order is contrary to the law or that any provisions of the Foreign Trade Policy or the handbook of procedures has been violated. Resultantly, this Court finds no reason to interfere with the present Writ Petition” the Court concluded.
Subscribe Taxscan Premium to view the JudgmentSupport our journalism by subscribing to Taxscanpremium. Follow us on Telegram for quick updates
