TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
1993 (3) TMI 119
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... paragraph declared that REP Licences/Exim Scrips are also valid for import of any other items of raw materials, components, tools, consumables and packing materials listed in Appendices 3 and 5, Part A. It is not in dispute that raw silk was included in Appendix 5, Part A of the Import and Export Policy 1990-93. 3. On 1st April 1992 a new Import Policy being the Export and Import Policy 1992-97 came into force. Paragraph 4 Chapter I of the new Policy provided, inter alia, "licences issued before the commencement of this Policy shall continue to be valid for import/export of the items permitted therein." 4. The petitioners had purchased REP Licences/Exim Scrips issued under the old Policy. Between 19th November 1992 and 19th December 1992....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ral of Foreign Trade was not a clarification at all. In any event, the vested right of the petitioners could not be taken away by virtue of a mere clarification. (3) The impugned clarification resulted in making the petitioners' Exim Scrips/REP Licences ineffective. Licences could only be cancelled or rendered ineffective in terms of paragraphs 9 and 10 of the Import Control Order. The impugned Circular did not come within any of those grounds. (4) The impugned Circular was unreasonable as no grounds had been disclosed for limiting the benefit of the new policy to Exim Scrips/REP Licences which were specifically endorsed. (5) The respondents-Authorities were, in any event, bound by the principles of promissory estoppel. They had represen....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....al. The appeal was disposed of by an order dated 25th January 1993. By that order the respondents were directed to release 80 per cent of the goods covered by REP Licences/Exim Scrips upon payment of duty on the entire consignment and upon furnishing of I.T.C. Bond for the entire consignment after provisional assessment of duty 20 per cent of the goods were directed to be retained by the respondents in a bonded warehouse until the matter was finally disposed of by the Trial Court. Liberty was also given to the respondents to adjudicate whether the goods were covered by the licences or not. 10. It does not appear that the respondents-authorities preferred any appeal from the order dated 25th January 1993. 11. The matter of Prakash Overseas....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....3, S.C. Sen, J. was not called upon to consider many of the points raised by the petitioners in this petition. In particular, His Lordship was not called upon to determine whether the cut off date should be the date on which the clarification was made known. In paragraph 10 of the affidavit in opposition filed by the respondents-authorities, it has been stated that the Customs authorities had allowed the goods to be released against Exim Scrips/REP Licences upto 3rd January 1993. They must have done so because they were not aware of the clarification contained in the impugned Circular. In fact, in paragraph 14 of the petition the petitioners had specifically averred that the Customs authorities came to know of the impugned Circular only on ....