TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2010 (10) TMI 896
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....order dated 31-3-2005, rejected the petitioner's application for grant of licence under EPCG scheme, whereupon, an appeal came to be filed before the Additional Export Commissioner on 21-4-2005. The 3rd respondent herein-Joint Director General of Foreign Trade, Madurai, decided to issue the EPCG licence to the petitioner-firm provisionally on condition that the firm should submit an undertaking, in a Stamp Paper binding itself to the decision of the Headquarters with whom reference is pending, to the effect that they would pay 100% of duty saved amount together with 15% interest thereon from the date of import if the Headquarters does not concur with the decisions of ZSDGFT, Chennai. Subsequently, the Joint Director General of Foreign Trade....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....titioner-firm has come up with the present writ petition. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner, by stating that inasmuch as the Policy Circular, dated 15-7-2005, whereby second-hand capital goods of Indian origin are not permitted to be imported under EPCG Scheme, does not operate with any retrospective effect, the same cannot be cited by the Department to reject the petitioner's claim for issuance of EPCG licence, would submit that nowhere in the scheme as envisaged in the Foreign Trade Policy, there is any provision available, by invoking which, an EPCG licence can be refused for import of second-hand goods of Indian origin, for, paragraph-5.1 of the Foreign Trade policy explicitly states that second-hand capital goods without any ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ng for Respondents-1 to 4 would, at the foremost, submit that the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the petitioner would fall to ground for the simple reason that the policy circular (No. 16). dated 15-7-2005 is not a new decision but it is clarificafory in nature and further, it has not been withdrawn till date. In this regard, he referred to Policy Circular No. 16, dated 15-7-2005 as well as previous policy Circular No. 18, dated 10-1-2002, issued by the Ministry of Commerce and Industry, Directorate General of Foreign Trade, which clarify para No. 5.1 of the Foreign Trade Policy 2004-2009 updated as on 31-3-2005, permitting import of second-hand capital goods without any age restrictions under EPCG scheme, to the effect that ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....Assistant Solicitor General. 5. Considered the rival submissions made on either side. It is seen that the application made by the petitioner-firm for grant of EPCG licence was rejected by the 2nd respondent by order dated 31-3-2005. While the appeal preferred by the petitioner-firm was pending and later came to be rejected, the 3rd respondent, before referring the matter to the 1st respondent, decided to issue the EPCG licence in favour of the petitioner, on provisional basis and, on the direction of the Zonal Joint Director General of Foreign Trade, Chennai, he called for the petitioner to submit an undertaking to the effect that, in the event of the authority at the Headquarters/1st respondent not concurring with the decision to al....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....n one reason. Admittedly, the petitioner's application was rejected by the 2nd respondent observing that allowing the request would amount to re-import of goods. Thereafter, by letter dated 21-4-2005, the petitioner-firm appealed to the Additional Export Commissioner to consider their request as it involves the question of survival of their small unit, whereupon, the 3rd respondent granted provisional licence only on the condition that the petitioner would pay 100% of duty saved amount together with 15% interest thereon from the date of import of the machinery, if the Headquarters does not concur with the decision of ZJDGFT, Chennai, in granting the licence. The petitioner-firm did not choose to question the rejection order passed by the 2n....