Page 17 - ELT_1st June 2020_VOL 372_Part 5th

2020 ] INDEX - 1st June, 2020 xv
Ex parte order in revision petition filed by Department when set aside - See
under REVISION .................................. 671
EXIM - Advance authorisation licence - Proof of export - Failure to prepare
“Bills of Export” at time of supply of goods made to SEZ Unit - Officer-
in-Charge of SEZ Unit refusing to heed to request to provide necessary
Bills of Export against those supply stating that Bills of Export could not
be provided at a later date after exports have been done - Policy
Relaxation Committee also refusing to waive condition of preparation of
Bill of Export for the supplies made by assessee to SEZ Unit - On a writ
petition - HELD : Assessee failed to comply with requirements under
relevant rules and also failed to impleaded SEZ Unit as party to
proceedings - SEZ unit was necessary party as it could answer as to
whether goods were received at SEZ unit - Assessee had not complied
with various statutory provisions by not furnishing Bill of Exports -
Condition of producing Bill of Export, a necessary condition and cannot
be waived unless and until proved otherwise that the goods were
exported by exporter - Proof required for purpose was “Bill of Export”
and it was not submitted by assessee - Whether goods were supplied to
SEZ Unit could be looked into after assessee files reply to Department in
respect of letters issued to it - These being purely questions of fact could
be looked into by competent authority - Section 30 of Special Economic
Zones Act, 2005 - Rule 30(3) of Special Economic Zones Rules, 2006 —
MPD Industries Pvt. Ltd. v. Union of India (M.P.) ..................... 638
— Advance authorisation licence - Redemption - Export obligation, non-
fulfilment of - Supplies to SEZ - Bill of Export not submitted by petitioner
and ARE-1 Forms submitted with the Excise Department at the time of
supplies to SEZ Unit did not bear the endorsement of Advance
Authorization Number or its date - Quantity of input used by petitioner
in the goods that was so supplied, also not specified - Copies of ARE-1
with Advance Authorization Number and its date stamped by itself on
such ARE-1 submitted by petitioner only when Policy Relaxation
Committee (PRC) demanded submission of original ARE-1 - Exemption
from following policy/procedure to be granted only in cases of genuine
hardship or adverse impact on trade or in public interest and not where
exporters, even bona fide, are not vigilant or are lax in compliance with
the mandatory conditions - Decision of PRC not perverse or arbitrary -
Paragraphs 2.5 and 4.13 of Foreign Trade Policy, 2004-2009, Paragraph
4.12 of Handbook of Procedure, 2009-2014 as also Paragraph 4.27 of
Handbook of Procedures, 2015-2020 - Section 30 of Special Economic
Zones Rules, 2006 — Wadpack Private Limited v. Director General of Foreign Trade
(Del.) ......................................... 646
— Mineral ilmenite - Excavated from Norway and legally imported into
India - In such case, Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation)
Act, 1957 is not applicable - As it is freely importable, District Collector
has neither authority to interfere with imports nor exercise powers of
Central Government - Importer who legally imported this mineral was its
owner entitled to use it in its factory — V.V. Titanium Pigments Pvt. Ltd. v.
District Collector, Thoothukudi (Mad.) ........................... 654
Export obligation not fulfilled, scope of redemption of advance
authorization licence - See under EXIM ...................... 646

EXCISE LAW TIMES  1st June 2020  17