Page 136 - ELT_1st July 2020_Vol 373_Part 1

46 EXCISE LAW TIMES [ Vol. 373

[Order]. - The writ petition has been filed in the nature of Certiorarified
mandamus to quash the impugned rejection letters, totally 115 letters, issued be-
tween 27-11-2018 and 9-4-2019.
2. The writ petitioner is a company incorporated under the Companies
Act, 1956 and claims to be a manufacturer-exporter of industrial valves and parts
thereof/other accessories with a significant part of its revenue coming from ex-
ports. It has been claimed that the petitioner has also been granted Importer-
Exporter Code (IEC) Number 0488005043 on 24-5-1988 under Section 7 of the
Foreign Trade (Development and Regulation) Act, 1992. The petitioner claims
that the Central Government in exercise of its power under Section 5 of the For-
eign Trade (Development and Regulation) Act, notified the Foreign trade Policy,
2009-2014 with effect from 27-8-2009.
3. In the present case, the petitioner is involved with the Foreign Trade
Policy with respect to Additional items/markets for incentives. According to the
Learned Senior Counsel, the petitioner company is agreed with Item Code 8481
which is as follows :
“Items of a kind used on Bicycles :
Taps, Cocks, Valves and similar appliances for pipes, Boiler Shells,
Tanks, vats or the like, Including pressure reducing valves and thermostati-
cally controlled valves. ”
4. The time period for application for such concession is given as fol-
lows :
3.11.9. Applications for obtaining Duty Credit Scrip shall be filed
within a period of twelve months from the date of export or within six
months from the date of realization or three months from the date of print-
ing/release of shipping bill, whichever is later, in respect of shipments for
which claim is being filed. Further, for shipments already made prior to the
inclusion/modification of the items/markets in relevant appendices by var-
ious Public Notices issued from time to time; the last date for filing applica-
tions shall be six months from the end of the month of the relevant Public
Notice that included/notified the items/markets, or the time period per-
mitted in the first sentence of this Para, whichever is later.
5. It is thus seen that a specific period of time limit has been granted for
the said concession. The petitioner did not abide with seeking the said conces-
sion.
6. On the other hand, the Learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner
placed reliance on the challenge made to the entry itself namely the rejection of a
concession of sanction that has been challenged before the Gujarat High Court.
The Gujarat High Court had gone extensively into the issue in the Special Civil
Application Nos.11262, 11263, 11264 and 14808 of 2016 instituted by Intolcast Pri-
vate Limited and another v. Union of India and Another, 2017 (345) E.L.T. 217 (Guj.).
The issues raised before the Gujarat High Court were also with respect to the
challenge of the Trade Notice No. 11 of 2015, dated 14-12-2015 issued by the
Government of India. Even in that case, the petitioners therein were engaged in
manufacturing and exporting engineering goods like Casting, valves, parts of
valves, etc.
7. The Government of India had framed Foreign Trade Policy 2009-
2014. That Policy is the subject matter issue even before this Court now.
EXCISE LAW TIMES  1st July 2020  136