Duty Credit Certificate validity under Target Plus Scheme: 24-month limit and Entry 56 sustained, extension request denied.

Whether the 24-month validity for Duty Credit Certificates under the Target Plus Scheme was authorised, whether Entry 56 restricting set-off against certain levies was ultra vires, and whether time should be extended due to delayed issuance were considered. The court concluded that power to prescribe the 24-month validity derives from FTP and Handbook of Procedures and is not an improper delegation, so the validity period stands. Entry 56 merely clarifies scope of exemption and does not abrogate vested rights or act ultra vires. Relief to extend validity was denied, subject to consideration by the Policy Relaxation Committee on merits.

---

---

Issues Involved:
1. Validity of the 24-month period for availing Duty Credit Benefits under the Target Plus Scheme (TPS).
2. Legality of Entry 56 of the notification dated 01.07.2017, which limits the exemption on imports availed under Duty Credit Certificates.
3. Entitlement of the petitioner for an extension of time to avail the Duty Credit due to delays by the respondents.

Summary:

Issue 1: Validity of the 24-month period for availing Duty Credit Benefits under TPS:
The court examined whether the 24-month validity period prescribed in Clause 3.2.5(VII) of the Handbook of Procedures was without jurisdiction and illegal. The petitioner argued that this period was not expressly delegated by the parent legislation and thus was beyond the jurisdiction of the Director General of Foreign Trade (D.G.F.T). The court referred to various cases, including *State of Orissa v. Tata Sponge Iron Limited* and *Deepak Fertilizers and Petrochem v. Designated Authority*, concluding that the D.G.F.T, as an ex officio Additional Secretary to the Government of India, was authorized to prescribe such a validity period. The court held that the 24-month period was valid and had been consistently applied since the scheme's inception. Therefore, the court found no infirmity or illegality in Clause 3.2.5(VII) of the Handbook of Procedures.

Issue 2: Legality of Entry 56 of the notification dated 01.07.2017:
The court analyzed whether Entry 56, which limits the exemption on imports availed under Duty Credit Certificates to the levy of additional duties under Sections 3(1), 3(3), and 3(5) of the Customs Tariff Act, 1975, was illegal and took away vested rights. The court noted that the newly inserted sub-sections 3(7) and 3(9) relating to I.G.S.T and Compensation Cess were not referred to as 'additional duties'. The court concluded that Entry 56 merely clarified the existing position and did not take away any vested rights. Therefore, the court held that Entry 56 was not illegal or ultra vires.

Issue 3: Entitlement of the petitioner for an extension of time to avail the Duty Credit:
The court acknowledged the delays in issuing the Duty Credit Scrips due to various amendments and legal challenges. However, it noted that the 24-month period started from the date of issue of the scrips, thus not prejudicing the petitioner. The court emphasized that it could not extend the validity period by another 15 years, as it would amount to laying down a new scheme, which is beyond its jurisdiction. The court referred to cases like *Jain Exports Pvt. Ltd.* and *Ambika Mills Ltd., Ahmedabad*, stating that equitable considerations cannot be applied in matters of concession and exemption. However, the court noted that the petitioner had moved the Policy Relaxation Committee under Clause 2.5 of the Policy, and it was open for the Committee to consider the extension request on its own merits.

Result:
1. The Writ Petitions in W.P.Nos.3335 and 3337 of 2022 were dismissed.
2. W.P.No.3339 of 2022 was disposed of, rejecting the prayer to extend the validity period of the Duty Credit Certificate by 15 years and to use it to defray I.G.S.T and G.S.T Compensation Cess. However, the court allowed the Policy Relaxation Committee to consider the extension request on its own merits.
3. No order as to costs. Consequently, W.M.P.No.3458 of 2022 was closed.

---