Petitioner granted MEIS benefits despite earlier online declaration declining them under Jubilant Biosys precedent

The Delhi HC allowed a writ petition seeking MEIS benefits despite the petitioner's earlier online declaration declining such benefits. Following the precedent in Jubilant Biosys Limited vs. Directorate General of Foreign Trade, the court held that the petitioner could avail MEIS benefits and that the expiry of the last date would not bar the claim. The respondents were directed to consider the petitioner's case according to established legal principles. The petition was allowed with pending applications disposed of.

---

---

Issues Involved:

1. Correction of typographical error in the previous order.
2. Quashing of orders issued in PRC Meetings.
3. Direction to accept and process manual applications for MEIS benefits.
4. Direction for technical modifications in the DGFT portal/Customs ICEGATE System.
5. Consideration of previous judgments for similar issues.

Summary:

1. Correction of Typographical Error:
Learned Counsel for the Petitioner stated that there was a typographical error in the Order dated 14.03.2024, where the Court recorded that the matter is covered by the Judgment of the Apex Court. However, it is actually covered by the Judgments passed by this Court. Consequently, the Order dated 14.03.2024 stands corrected accordingly.

2. Quashing of Orders Issued in PRC Meetings:
The Petitioner sought the issuance of a Writ of Certiorari to quash the orders issued in the PRC Meetings No. 31/AM19 dated 19.02.2019, 15/AM20 dated 13.08.2019, and 15/AM21 dated 03.11.2020 & 11.11.2020.

3. Direction to Accept and Process Manual Applications for MEIS Benefits:
The Petitioner prayed for a Writ of Mandamus directing Respondent No. 2/3 to accept, consider, and process a manual application for MEIS benefits in respect of exports for which Respondent Nos. 6, 8, and 9 have issued no objection certificates. Additionally, the Petitioner sought directions for Respondent Nos. 7, 8, and 10 to issue no objection certificates for the balance shipping bills and for Respondent No. 2/3 to process a manual application for MEIS benefits accordingly.

4. Direction for Technical Modifications in DGFT Portal/Customs ICEGATE System:
In the alternative, the Petitioner requested technical modifications in the DGFT portal/Customs ICEGATE System to amend the reward column of the shipping bills from 'No' to 'Yes'. If necessary, the Petitioner also sought directions for Respondent No. 4 to reconsider the request to permit filing a manual application for MEIS claims based on no-objection certificates.

5. Consideration of Previous Judgments for Similar Issues:
The Petitioner relied on the Judgment dated 10.05.2023 in the case of "M/s RK Agroexport Pvt. Ltd vs. Union of India and Ors." and other similar judgments where the Court took a lenient view and granted MEIS benefits despite inadvertent errors in the reward column of shipping bills. The Court observed that similar benefits should be extended to the Petitioner and directed Respondent No. 4 to transmit the corrected bills through manual intervention at ICEGATE. The DGFT (Respondent No. 2) was directed to process the Petitioner's claim for benefits under the MEIS scheme within six weeks.

Conclusion:
The present writ petition was allowed on the same terms and conditions as the previous similar judgments. The Petitioner will now be able to take the benefit of the Merchandise Exports from India Scheme (MEIS), and the expiration of the last date will not hinder the Petitioner. The Respondents were directed to consider the Petitioner's case in accordance with the law laid down by this Court. Pending applications, if any, were disposed of.

---