TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
When case Id is present, search is done only for this
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>Court orders revalidation of REP Licences, citing Import/Export Policy provisions.</h1> <h3>KAVITA EXPORTS PRIVATE LIMITED Versus UNION OF INDIA</h3> KAVITA EXPORTS PRIVATE LIMITED Versus UNION OF INDIA - 1989 (42) E.L.T. 393 (Bom.) Issues:Claim for re-validation of REP LicencesAnalysis:The petitioners, exporters of stainless steel castings, sought re-validation of two REP Licences or issuance of fresh licenses. The licenses were initially valid until May 1985 for importing stainless steel melting scrap. The petitioners faced delays due to amendments in the Letter of Credit and a moratorium granted to the bank. Their requests for re-validation were rejected by various authorities citing lack of provision for re-validation of licenses for merchant exporters. The petitioners contended that the Import and Export Policy conferred power to re-validate licenses.The court analyzed the relevant clauses of the Import and Export Policy for April 1985-March 1988. Clause 63 specified the validity period of licenses, while Clause 72 mentioned no grace period for shipment beyond the validity period. However, Clause 73 allowed for extension requests for Capital Goods licenses. Clause 80 provided for extensions in exceptional circumstances like dockyard strikes. The court noted that the power to extend validity was not limited to dockyard strikes only. The petitioners had complied with all requirements within the stipulated time, and external factors caused delays beyond their control.The court found the respondents' denial of re-validation solely based on the lack of power, without considering other factors. It highlighted Clause 37 of the Import and Export Policy, allowing relaxation of policy in cases of genuine hardship or adverse export impact. As the court determined that the power to re-validate existed, it directed the 2nd Respondent to revalidate the REP Licences for six months from the intimation date. This decision allowed the petitioners to open fresh Letters of Credit for their foreign suppliers. The court ruled in favor of the petitioners, granting their prayers for re-validation based on the policy provisions and the circumstances of the case.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
