Export documentation compliance controls discharge of obligation; relaxation is limited to genuine hardship or public interest.

Mandatory export-document requirements under the Foreign Trade Policy and Handbook of Procedure required endorsement of shipping or supply documents with authorization particulars and submission of prescribed proof to discharge export obligation. Supplies to SEZ units also had to be supported by a Bill of Export, with the endorsed ARE-1 treated as proof of export. The relaxation power under paragraph 2.5 of the Foreign Trade Policy was confined to genuine hardship, adverse trade impact, or public interest, and could not be used to excuse mere laxity or non-vigilant compliance. On these facts, the absence of Bills of Export and the insufficiency of substituted materials meant the request for condonation and discharge-related benefits was refused.

---

---

Issues: Whether the petitioner was entitled to condonation of the lapse in not filing Bills of Export for supplies to SEZ units and to issuance of the Export Obligation Discharge Certificate and Redemption Certificate under the Advance Authorization scheme.

Analysis: The Foreign Trade Policy and Handbook of Procedure required compliance with the prescribed documentation for discharge of export obligation, including endorsement of the shipping or supply documents with the authorization particulars and submission of the prescribed documents in support of fulfilment of export obligation. The Special Economic Zone Rules also required a Bill of Export to accompany supplies claimed as export entitlement, and treated a copy of the Bill of Export with endorsed ARE-1 as proof of export. The relaxation power under paragraph 2.5 of the Foreign Trade Policy was confined to cases of genuine hardship, adverse impact on trade, or public interest, and could not be invoked to excuse mere laxity or non-vigilant compliance. The petitioner had not filed the Bills of Export and the substituted materials were found insufficient and self-serving, while the PRC's refusal was neither perverse nor arbitrary.

Conclusion: The request for condonation and grant of discharge-related benefits was rightly refused, and the challenge to the PRC decision failed.

Ratio Decidendi: Relaxation under the Foreign Trade Policy cannot be granted to cure non-compliance with mandatory export-document requirements unless the case shows genuine hardship, public interest, or another legally recognised ground warranting such relief.

---