Court quashes duty credit restriction under Target Plus Scheme, orders additional entitlement grant.

The Court allowed the petition, quashing the amendment restricting duty credit entitlement under the Target Plus Scheme. The respondent was directed to grant the additional entitlement denied to the petitioner within a specified timeframe.

---

---

Issues:
Challenge to amendment in Foreign Trade Policy affecting duty credit entitlement under Target Plus Scheme.

Analysis:
1. Background: The petitioner, a company engaged in manufacturing and exporting aluminum extrusions, challenged the amendment in the Foreign Trade Policy affecting duty credit entitlement under the Target Plus Scheme.

2. Target Plus Scheme: The Government announced the Target Plus Scheme to reward Star Export Houses achieving quantum growth in exports. The scheme aimed to accelerate export growth by granting duty credits based on incremental exports, with specific percentage entitlements based on the growth achieved.

3. Amendment Controversy: An amendment was made to the policy, reducing the entitlement percentage for incremental growth in exports. This led to a dispute where the petitioner's entitlement was reduced, contrary to the original policy provisions.

4. Legal Argument: The petitioner contended that the amendment, which sought to take away the benefit accrued under the original policy, was impermissible. They argued that the vested rights could not be retrospectively altered by the amendment, citing the doctrine of promissory estoppel.

5. Judicial Precedent: The petitioner relied on the Supreme Court judgment in MRF Limited v. Assistant Commissioner, emphasizing that any statute impairing vested rights or creating new obligations should not have retrospective effect. The judgment highlighted the importance of upholding promises made under existing policies.

6. Constitutional Challenge: The petitioner further challenged the amendment as unconstitutional and ultra vires Article 191(l)(g) and the provisions of the Foreign Trade (Development and Regulation) Act, 1992.

7. Court Decision: Considering the arguments and legal principles, the Court allowed the petition, quashing the amendment restricting the duty credit entitlement. The respondent was directed to grant the additional entitlement denied to the petitioner within a specified timeframe.

This detailed analysis of the judgment highlights the issues, arguments, and the ultimate decision rendered by the Court in response to the challenge brought forth by the petitioner regarding the amendment affecting duty credit entitlement under the Target Plus Scheme.

---