The Delhi High Court allowed the gold importers to file review application against the DGFT’s order reducing the rate of Bullion Tariff Rate Quota (TRQ) allocation .
The petitioners are engaged in the business of importing gold bullion which are used for the manufacturing of gold ornaments. The petitioners are aggrieved by the Minutes of Meeting dated 08.11.2024, in terms of which, the utilization of allocated Bullion Tariff Rate Quota (‘TRQ’) for the Financial Year 2024-25, under the India-UAE Comprehensive Economic Partnership Agreement dated 18.02.2022 (hereinafter referred as ‘CEPA’) was reviewed and revised mid-term by the respondent no.1.
Read More: Unfair to Charge Toll on Poor Roads: J&K High Court Orders 80% Reduction
Pursuant to the execution of CEPA, a meeting was held on 15.04.2024 at the Directorate General of Foreign Trade (DGFT) headquarters for consideration of the allocation of the bullion TRQs under the CEPA for the Financial Year 2024-25. The respondents in the aforesaid meeting decided/concluded to allocate the said TRQs based on the said
Step by Step Handbook for Filing GST Appeals Click Here
Modalities. Further, the Committee decided to review the utilisations of given TRQs in the October’2024. The Committee may thereafter choose to revise the extant TRQ allocations based on the TRQ imports made till September’2024.”
The petitioners had applied for the TRQ in CEPA for the import of gold bullion, and based on the aforesaid decision/meeting, the petitioners were issued a certificate/license with validity up to 31.03.2025. Subsequently, in terms of paragraph no. 7 of the Minutes of the aforesaid Meeting, the respondents held a mid-year review of allocation of bullion TRQ under CEPA for FY 2024-25.
It is submitted by the counsel on behalf of the petitioners that based on their respective utilization records available with the DGST, the quantity allocated to them was reduced by half (to 50%) of the original allocation. The petitioners were also directed not to not make imports beyond the revised reduced quantity.
It is averred in the petition that the aforesaid decision is unreasonable and arbitrary because firstly, the said decision was taken without granting an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner and without a sufficient prior notice and secondly since criteria for revising the TRQ allocation were never communicated to the petitioners, they had no basis to anticipate that their imports are required to be aligned with the criteria subsequently laid down in the Minutes of the Meeting dated 08.11.2024.
Step by Step Handbook for Filing GST Appeals Click Here
Further, it is averred in the petitions that the paragraph 7 of the Minutes of Meeting held on 15.04.2024 which provided for the review of TRQs and paragraph 6 of the Minutes of Meeting dated 08.11.2024 which reviewed and revised the allocated TRQs are without jurisdiction and in excess of authority of the respondent no.1 because any revision before the expiry period of licence is in contravention to the provisions of the Foreign Trade (Development & Regulation) Act, 1992, Foreign Trade (Regulation) Rules, 1993 and the procedures prescribed in the Handbook of Procedures, 2023 dated 01.04.2023(notified vide public notice no.1 of 2023).
A single bench of Justice Sachin Datta disposed of the appeal by directing the petitioners to file an application for review before the DGFT within one week from today whereupon the DGFT shall examine all the issues raised by the petitioners in the present petitions and issue fresh orders/directions, within a period of three weeks thereafter.
Step by Step Handbook for Filing GST Appeals Click Here
It was further held that “In the event that the respondents are inclined to accept the petitioners’ requests, the DGFT may introduce additional conditions to ensure that the petitioners comply with the TRQ allocation and carry out the imports, in accordance with law. “
Subscribe Taxscan Premium to view the JudgmentSupport our journalism by subscribing to Taxscan premium. Follow us on Telegram for quick updates
