Court upholds decision on denied export benefit claim due to technical error, emphasizes on intent and verification

The Court upheld the Single Judge's decision in a case involving the denial of an export benefit claim under the MEIS due to an omission in checking the 'Yes' box on the web portal. The Court directed a fresh consideration of the claim, emphasizing that the denial based solely on a technical lapse was unjustified, given the clear indications of the exporter's intention in other details. The Court rejected the argument that necessary verification was not possible, stating that physical verification at the time of export sufficed. It also criticized the imposition of a time limit on such claims, emphasizing that inadvertent omissions should not lead to denial of benefits.

---

---

Issues:
Denial of export benefit claim under MEIS due to omission in checking the 'Yes' box on the web portal.

Analysis:
The judgment involves a challenge to the denial of a claim for export benefit under the Merchandise Exports from India Scheme (MEIS) as per the Foreign Trade Policy, 2015-20. The denial was based on the writ petitioners omitting to check the 'Yes' box on the web portal, indicating their intention to avail the reward under the Scheme. The Single Judge found that the default setting in the software was 'No', leading to the omission. However, it was noted that the writ petitioners had clearly expressed their intention to claim the benefit of MEIS in the description of goods and shipping bill. The Single Judge emphasized that the denial based solely on a technical lapse was unjustified, especially when there were clear indications of the exporter's intention to claim the rewards in other details. Consequently, the writ petitions were disposed of, directing a fresh consideration of the claim by the appellants and the Director General of Foreign Trade, taking into account the exporter's intention as manifested during the export. Customs Authorities were also directed to issue a 'No Objection Certificate' for processing the claim afresh.

The appellants contended that since the 'Yes' box was not checked, necessary verification of the export consignment was not done at the relevant time, making verification impossible now. However, the Court rejected this argument, stating that physical verification of the consignment was already done at the time of export, which would reveal the identity of the goods exported. If the exported goods align with those eligible for MEIS benefits, further physical verification is unnecessary for deciding on the claim.

Furthermore, it was highlighted that a Circular by the Director General of Foreign Trade allowed such claims for a limited period of six months from the Scheme's introduction. The Court found no rationale in imposing such a time limit, especially when the exporter's intention was evident from other uploaded details and shipping documents. The inadvertent omission of checking the 'Yes' box should not justify denying the claim, and there should be no discrimination between exporters based on the timing of their claims. Consequently, the Court upheld the Single Judge's decision, dismissing the writ appeals as there was no identified illegality, error, or impropriety in allowing the writ petitions.

---