Special import-export policy entitlement prevails over general restriction, but delay can justify partial curtailment of relief

A special import-export policy provision for Export Houses was treated as an exception to the general restriction on shipment validity, so revalidation of the imprest licence and endorsement for import of OGL items was available under para 185(4) despite para 185(7). The Court read the two provisions harmoniously and held that the petitioner had an accrued entitlement to the special relief. However, long delay in seeking endorsement was relevant to equitable moulding of relief, so the benefit was curtailed by a 25% reduction rather than denied altogether.

---

---

Issues: (i) Whether the petitioner was entitled to revalidation of the imprest licence and endorsement for import of OGL items under para 185(4) of the Import-Export Policy AM 82-83 notwithstanding para 185(7); (ii) whether the petitioners' delay in seeking endorsement warranted curtailment of the relief.

Issue (i): Whether the petitioner was entitled to revalidation of the imprest licence and endorsement for import of OGL items under para 185(4) of the Import-Export Policy AM 82-83 notwithstanding para 185(7).

Analysis: Para 185(4) created a special scheme for Export Houses which had discharged their export obligations, and it expressly contemplated revalidation of the advance or imprest licence for a six-month period where the licence had expired or where the unexpired period was less than six months. Para 185(7) was a general restriction governing shipment within the validity of the OGL or licence period. The two provisions were to be read harmoniously, with para 185(4) operating as an exception to para 185(7). The petitioner therefore had an accrued entitlement to revalidation and consequential endorsement under the special provision.

Conclusion: The petitioner was entitled to revalidation and endorsement under para 185(4), and para 185(7) did not bar that relief.

Issue (ii): Whether the petitioners' delay in seeking endorsement warranted curtailment of the relief.

Analysis: Although the substantive entitlement existed, the petitioners approached the authorities long after the Export House Certificate had expired. The Court treated this delay as relevant to the moulding of equitable relief and considered that a reduction in the benefit would balance the equities.

Conclusion: The delay justified restricting the relief by a 25% cut in the benefit granted.

Final Conclusion: The impugned rejection was set aside, but the relief of revalidation and endorsement was granted only in a curtailed form, with a 25% reduction in the import benefit and a direction for compliance within a fixed time.

Ratio Decidendi: A special enabling provision in an import-export policy must prevail over a general restriction when the two can be harmoniously construed, and delay may justify equitable reduction of the relief without defeating the substantive entitlement.

---