High Court Quashes Non-Admissible Appeal Order in MEIS Scrip Dispute. Resolving ambiguity in appeal provisions under the Foreign Trade (Development and Regulation) Act, 1992.

Sub Category: Bombay High Court
  • 27
Judgement Image
Font size:
Print

Case Note & Summary

  Maintainability of Appeal: Rejection letters from JDGFT constitute appealable decisions under Section 15. The ADGFT acted within its jurisdiction. Non-Speaking Orders: Administrative or quasi-judicial decisions must articulate clear reasoning for transparency and accountability. Remand for Fresh Adjudication: JDGFT must reconsider the application with proper reasoning, ensuring fair hearing and adherence to legal principles. 1. Case Overview: Petitioner: Ashwini Ashish Dighe, a business operator engaged in manufacturing optical fibers under "Sunteck Telecommunications." Respondents: Union of India and several trade officials. Issue: Rejection of an MEIS duty credit scrip application for exports warehoused in a Free Trade and Warehousing Zone (FTWZ) and subsequent appeal dismissal by ADGFT. 2. Background: Initial Rejection (2020): Application for MEIS scrip benefits rejected for lack of evidence correlating exports to the benefits claimed. Opportunity Provided (2021): Court allowed fresh submission of evidence. Second Rejection (2022): JDGFT rejected the application, citing Paragraph 3.06 of the Foreign Trade Policy (FTP), which deems exports from FTWZ units ineligible. 3. Legal Contentions: Petitioner: Challenged the appeal dismissal, asserting maintainability under Sections 9 and 15 of the Foreign Trade (Development and Regulation) Act, 1992. Claimed JDGFT’s rejection lacked reasoning. Respondents: Defended the rejection, arguing the appeal was filed with the wrong authority (ADGFT) and that the supplies were ineligible under the FTP. 4. High Court's Analysis: Adjudicating Authority: The JDGFT was deemed to have adjudicating authority for this purpose under Section 15, despite objections from the respondents. Appeal Jurisdiction: The ADGFT was held competent to hear the appeal, as per government notification and Section 15(1)(b). Speaking Order Requirement: The court emphasized the need for a speaking order to justify the JDGFT's rejection of the MEIS scrip application. Legal Framework:

Foreign Trade (Development and Regulation) Act, 1992:

Section 9: Governs the issuance, suspension, and cancellation of licenses and scrips. Section 15: Allows appeals against orders by adjudicating authorities.

Foreign Trade Policy (FTP):

Paragraph 3.06: Specifies ineligibility criteria for exports made through FTWZ. Subjects:

Foreign Trade Law, Administrative Law, Quasi-Judicial Decisions.

#MEISScrip #ForeignTradeAct1992 #AdministrativeLaw #JudicialReview #TradePolicy

Issue of Consideration: Ashwini Ashish Dighe Versus The Union Of India & Ors.

2024 LawText (BOM) (12) 118

WRIT PETITION NO.350 OF 2024

2024-12-11

M. S. Sonak & Jitendra Jain, JJ.

Mr. Sanjeev Nair a/w Mr. Kevin Gogri a/w Ms. Dhruvi Shah, Lumiere Law Partners for the petitioner. Mr. J.B.Mishra a/w Mr. D.P. Singh a/w Mr. Vikas Salgia for respondents.

Ashwini Ashish Dighe

The Union Of India & Ors.

Related Judgement
High Court High Court Quashes Non-Admissible Appeal Order in MEIS Scrip Dispute. Resolving...
Related Judgement
High Court Bombay High Court Nullifies Faceless Assessment Notices Issued Without Jurisdict...