TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
When case Id is present, search is done only for this
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>Penalty upheld under Foreign Trade Act for breach of Advance Licence terms. No personal hearing required.</h1> <h3>VARALAKSHMI EXPORTS Versus UNION OF INDIA </h3> The Court upheld the order imposing a penalty of Rs. 1.50 crores under the Foreign Trade (Development and Regulation) Act for violating the terms of an ... Writ jurisdiction - Natural justice - Personal hearing under Section 14(d) of Foreign Trade (Development and Regulation) Act, 1992 alleged to be not given before imposing penalty for alleged violation of conditions of Advance Licence Issues:Challenge to order imposing penalty under Foreign Trade (Development and Regulation) Act for alleged violation of terms and conditions of Advance Licence.Analysis:The appellants filed a writ petition seeking to quash an order passed by the 2nd respondent imposing a penalty of Rs. 1.50 crores under Section 11 read with Section 14 of the Foreign Trade (Development and Regulation) Act, 1992. The penalty was imposed for the alleged violation of terms and conditions of an Advance Licence granted for importing mulberry raw silk fabrics. The order was confirmed in appeal by the 3rd respondent. The main contention raised by the appellants was the lack of a personal hearing before imposing the penalty, as required under Section 14(d) of the Act. The authorities had given the petitioners an opportunity for a personal hearing on a specified date, but the appellants failed to appear and only submitted a representation. Consequently, the impugned order was passed by the 2nd respondent.Upon review, the Court found that the decision-making process was conducted without any illegality or irregularity. The Court emphasized that the judicial review under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India pertains to examining the legality and regularity of the decision-making process. Since the Court was satisfied that there was no flaw in the decision-making process, it declined to interfere with the impugned order. Consequently, the writ appeal was dismissed, upholding the order imposing the penalty under the Foreign Trade (Development and Regulation) Act for the violation of the terms and conditions of the Advance Licence.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
