Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 0, Cited by 0]

Delhi High Court - Orders

Polycab India Limited vs Union Of India & Ors on 16 January, 2023

Author: Prathiba M. Singh

Bench: Prathiba M. Singh

                          $~30
                          *      IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
                          +                              W.P.(C) 4004/2022
                                 POLYCAB INDIA LIMITED                      ..... Petitioner
                                                Through: Mr. P.C. Pahtak, Mr. Manoj, Mr.
                                                         Hemant and Mr. Ajay, Advocates (M:
                                                         9810358384).
                                                versus
                                 UNION OF INDIA & ORS.              ..... Respondents
                                                Through: Mr. Vivek Goyal, CGSPC with Mr.
                                                         Gokul Sharma Advocates (M:
                                                         9045885304).
                                                         Ms. Akanksha Das, Advocate for R-4
                                                         (M: 9545355646).
                                                         Mr. A.K. Roy, Advocate for R-5 (M:
                                                         9811678928).
                                 CORAM:
                                 JUSTICE PRATHIBA M. SINGH
                                          ORDER

% 16.01.2023

1. This hearing has been done through hybrid mode.

2. The present Petition has been filed by the Petitioner Company- Polycab India Limited seeking the quashing of the decision of Respondent No. 2- Policy Relaxation Committee, Directorate General of Foreign Trade (DGFT), Delhi taken in Meeting No. 17/AM22 held on 3rd December, 2021 and refund of Terminal Excise Duty (TED) amounting to Rs. 67,24,351 under the Deemed Exports Scheme of the Foreign Trade Policy. The impugned decision of the Policy Relaxation Committee, DGFT is extracted as under:

"PH Case No. 09 M/s.Polycab India Ltd., Mumbai F. No.HQRPRCAPPLY00047630AM22 Meeting No.17/AM22 held on 03.12.2021 Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:DEVANSHU JOSHI Signing Date:17.01.2023 18:58:27 Subject: Refund of Terminal Excise Duty (TED) against file No.03/47/413/00142/AM19. The applicant had sought personal hearing in terms of Para 2.59 of FTP-2015-2020, which was afforded_ on

03.12.2021, Shri Puma Chandra Pattnaik, Authorized Representative appeared on behalf of the firm and made the following submissions:

The applicant stated that they had supplied the goods to Nuclear Power Project in which M/s. BHEL was appointed as main contractor and the applicant was appointed as sub-contractor. Treating the supplies made by them as Deemed exports in terms of FTP, they had submitted the application for refund of TED in year 2008 to RA Mumbai at their counter for which RA has issued deficiency on 22.12.2008. Since the documents required by RA were not in their possession, therefore they had addressed several letters/personal meetings/telephonic conversation with the main contractor as well as with the project authority for arranging the required documents. Due to their best efforts, they have got certain documents and submitted the same to RA on 01.02.2019 but RA rejected their case due to delay of more than 11 years on 06:08.2019. The aforementioned act of not providing the desired documents by the main contractor as well as the Project Authority was beyond their control and was one of the grounds of genuine hardship faced by the supplier of the goods. Hence, they are requesting to- refund the TED against file No. 03/4 7/413/00142/AM19.
Decision: The Committee heard and examined the case on the basis of submission made by the applicant and discussed the matter at length. The Committee noted after submitting the file at counter for scrutiny in 2008, application was submitted by the firm only in 2019 (after almost 11 years). Further the applicant has not submitted any cogent reason/ justification in support of any genuine hardship faced by them.
Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:DEVANSHU JOSHI Signing Date:17.01.2023 18:58:27
Accordingly, the Committee decided to reject the request of the firm."
3. Vide order dated 1st April, 2022, the Court recorded the following observation:
"The Court takes note of the challenge in the writ petition with learned counsel contended that the refund of Terminal Excise Duty could not have been denied merely because the principal contractor had failed to furnish the requisite information and documents. Matter requires consideration."

4. Today, ld. Counsel for the Union of India (UOI) seeks time to file a counter affidavit in this matter. Let the same be filed within six weeks.

5. List before the Registrar for completion of service on 24th April, 2023.

6. List before the Court on 4th August, 2023.

PRATHIBA M. SINGH, J.

JANUARY 16, 2023 MR/AM Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:DEVANSHU JOSHI Signing Date:17.01.2023 18:58:27