Import Export Code condition under Foreign Trade Policy held inconsistent with the parent statute for SEIS benefits.

Section 7 of the Foreign Trade (Development and Regulation) Act, 1992 requires an Import Export Code for exports, but the proviso ties that requirement to export of services or technology only when a service provider seeks Foreign Trade Policy benefits. Paragraph 3.08(f) of the Foreign Trade Policy 2015-20, by requiring an active code at the time services were rendered, imposed an additional condition not found in the parent Act. A delegated policy cannot add a substantive restriction inconsistent with the enabling statute, so the condition was held unenforceable for SEIS eligibility.

---

---

Issues: Whether the condition in paragraph 3.08(f) of the Foreign Trade Policy 2015-20 requiring an active Import Export Code at the time of rendering services could validly be insisted upon for claiming Services Export from India Scheme benefits, having regard to section 7 of the Foreign Trade (Development and Regulation) Act, 1992.

Analysis: Section 7 of the Foreign Trade (Development and Regulation) Act, 1992 requires an Import Export Code for import or export, but the proviso makes it necessary for export of services or technology only when the service provider is taking benefit under the foreign trade policy. The provision does not state that the code must exist at the time services are rendered. Paragraph 3.08(f) of the Foreign Trade Policy 2015-20, by insisting on an active code at the time of rendition of services, imposed an additional restriction not found in the parent statute. A delegated policy cannot create a substantive obligation inconsistent with the enabling Act.

Conclusion: The condition in paragraph 3.08(f) of the Foreign Trade Policy 2015-20 was held inconsistent with the parent statute and could not be enforced against the petitioner for SEIS eligibility.

---