Conditional EPCG relaxation depends on proper shipping bill particulars and supporting documents; missing details can defeat the claim.

Relaxation under the EPCG scheme for procedural lapses was conditional, not automatic. For third-party exports, the cited circular required supporting documents and the relevant shipping bills to show both the third party's name and the licence holder's name, alongside the prescribed endorsement requirements in the Handbook of Procedures. Because the appellant did not produce the shipping bills and admitted that the required particulars were absent, the authorities could not verify the genuineness of the claim. On those facts, non-compliance was treated as substantive rather than curable, and the claimed EPCG benefit was rejected.

---

---

Issues: Whether the appellant was entitled to relaxation of the condition requiring the EPCG licence number, date of licence and the licence holder's name to be mentioned on the shipping bills, and whether non-production of the shipping bills and non-compliance with the stipulated condition defeated the claim for benefit under the EPCG scheme.

Analysis: Circular No. 7/2002 was issued to condone certain procedural lapses in relation to exports made for fulfillment of export obligation under the EPCG scheme, but the relaxation was conditional. In the case of third party exports, the circular required specified supporting documents and further required that the relevant shipping bills contain both the names of the third party and the licence holder. The appellant did not produce the shipping bills before the authorities and admitted that the names of the third parties and the licence holder were not mentioned on them. In the absence of these particulars, the authorities could not verify the genuineness of the claim, and the appellant also failed to comply with the endorsement requirement in the Handbook of Procedures.

Conclusion: The condition was not a mere curable formality on the facts of the case, and the appellant was not entitled to the claimed relaxation. The rejection of the benefit under the EPCG scheme was upheld.

---