Karnataka High Court
M/S Oswal Alloys Pvt Ltd vs Union Of India on 5 November, 2025
Author: B M Shyam Prasad
Bench: B M Shyam Prasad
-1-
NC: 2025:KHC:44781
WP No. 11685 of 2023
HC-KAR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 5TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2025
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B M SHYAM PRASAD
WRIT PETITION NO. 11685 OF 2023 (GM-RES)
BETWEEN:
M/S OSWAL ALLOYS PVT LTD
(A REGISTERED COMPANY UNDER
THE PROVISION OF FOREIGN TRADE)
(DEVELOPMENT AND REGULATION),
ACT, 1992, VIDE IEC NO.0706002831),
'OSWAL'S, NO.1034, 3RD FLOOR,
1ST MAIN ROAD, DR.RAJKUMAR ROAD,
4TH BLOCK, RAJAJINAGAR,
BENGALURU-560010.
REP BY SHRI. MOHANLAL BHARATH
Digitally KUMAR JAIN, DIRECTOR,
signed by S/O LATE SHRI, HIRACHAND MOHANLAL,
VANAMALA
N AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS.
Location:
HIGH ...PETITIONER
COURT OF
KARNATAKA (BY SRI. CHIDANANDA URS B G.,ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. UNION OF INDIA
MINISTRY OF INDUSTRY AND
COMMERCE, NORTH BLOCK,
NEW DELHI-110001,
REP BY SECRETARY.
-2-
NC: 2025:KHC:44781
WP No. 11685 of 2023
HC-KAR
2. THE DIRECTOR GENERAL OF
FOREIGN TRADE MINISTRY OF
COMMERCE AND INDUSTRY,
DIRECTORATE GENERAL OF
FOREIGN TRADE,
UDYOG BHAVAN,
NEW DELHI-110001,
(REP BY DIRECTOR GENERAL).
3. THE JOINT DIRECTOR GENERAL OF
FOREIGN TRADE
6TH FLOOR, C AND E WING,
KENDRIYA SADAN,
KORAMANGALA,
BANGALORE-560034,
(REP BY DEPUTY DIRECTOR GENERAL)
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. B PRAMOD.,ADVOCATE)
THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227
OF THE CONSTITUION OF INDIA PRAYING TO-QUASH
THE IMPUGNED ORDER PASSED BY THE R3 IN FILE
NO.072109200045AM15/592 DATED 30.03.2023 AT
ANNEXURE-K; DIRECT THE RESPONDENT AUTHORITY
TO ACCEPT THE APPLICATION DATED 12.02.2015 IN
ANNEXURE-3F AT ANNEXURE-C ALONG WITH
DOCUMENTS AS PER LETTER DATED 13.02.2015 FOR
GRANT OF DUTY CREDIT SCRIPT FOR BALANCE
AMOUNT OF RS. 1,43,89,742.12/- IN ACCORDANCE
WITH PARA 3.14.5(c) OF FOREIGN TRADE POLICY 2009-
-3-
NC: 2025:KHC:44781
WP No. 11685 of 2023
HC-KAR
14 AND PROCESS THE CLAIM IN ACCORDANCE WITH
LAW AFTER COMPLETION OF DETAILED SCRUTINY.
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY
HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS
UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B M SHYAM PRASAD
ORAL ORDER
The question for consideration is, whether there must be any further delay or protraction in the consideration of the petitioner's request for Duty Credit Scrip under the Incremental Exports Incentivisation Scheme [for short, 'the Scheme'] for a sum of Rs.1,43,89,742.12. The petitioner's grievance against non-consideration is examined by this Court in its earlier petition in W.P.No.12826/2018 [GM-FE], and this Court by the order dated 13.01.2023 has directed the concerned authority [a respondent in the aforesaid proceedings] to consider the petitioner's representation under law within three [3] months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of the -4- NC: 2025:KHC:44781 WP No. 11685 of 2023 HC-KAR order. Thereafter, the third respondent has issued the impugned order dated 30.03.2023 [Annexure-K].
2. In issuing this impugned order, the third respondent has referred to the different proceedings pending before the Hon'ble Supreme Court and has concluded that the petitioner is not entitled to the Duty Credit Scrip beyond Rs.1 Crore. The petitioner's representation is for the relevant year 2013-14. The Director General of Foreign Trade [the second respondent] has issued the Notification dated 25.09.2013 [Annexure-B1] incorporating certain additional sub-paragraphs to paragraph 3.14.5(c) of the Scheme, and these incorporated sub-paragraphs read as under:
"(i) Benefit of Incremental Export Incentivisation Scheme for the year 2013-14 will be limited to a scrip of a value not exceeding Rs.1 Crore per IEC.
(ii) Claims in excess of this value will be subjected to greater scrutiny by Regional Authority. "-5-
NC: 2025:KHC:44781 WP No. 11685 of 2023 HC-KAR In terms of the first paragraph, the petitioner as observed earlier is admitted to the benefit upto Rs.1 Crore and the benefit beyond this amount is rejected.
3. Sri Chidananda Urs B.G., the learned counsel for the petitioner, and Sri B. Pramod, the learned counsel for the respondents, are heard. It is stated in unison that [i] the different proceedings mentioned in Annexure-K have been disposed of by the Apex Court against the respondents, [ii] that the review petition in RP No.52978/2023 as against such orders is also dismissed as withdrawn and [iii] that with this it would no longer be in doubt that an exporter would be entitled for Duty Credit Scrip beyond Rs.1 Crore of the incremental difference in the turnover between the years 2012-13 and 2013-14 but subject to "a greater scrutiny by the Regional Authority".
4. Sri Chidananda Urs B.G. and Sri.B.Pramod also submit that this "greater scrutiny" -6-
NC: 2025:KHC:44781 WP No. 11685 of 2023 HC-KAR will involve calling for evidence of manufacture/purchase of export goods i.e. excise returns, sales, tax returns or any other evidence and checking exports of the company from whom goods have been purchased. This greater scrutiny is to verify export growth and consequent entitlement for Duty Credit Scrip under the Scheme. The learned counsels submit that the information from the other company will be to verify whether such company had done export in the two previous years, the quantum of exports in the previous two years, the quantum of exports in the current year.
5. These undisputed circumstances and sub- paragraph [ii] of paragraph 3.14.5(c) of the Scheme, bear out that the Regional Authority [the third respondent] must examine the petitioner's representation for Duty Credit Scrip over Rs.1 Crore with the opportunity to place on record the evidence as stated above and that the impugned order cannot -7- NC: 2025:KHC:44781 WP No. 11685 of 2023 HC-KAR be sustained. This Court, given that this representation is pending over 12 years, must also call upon the third respondent to conclude the proceedings and communicate its decision within a time frame; and this Court is also persuaded to opine that when documents are called for or examined, the third respondent must consider the same in the light of this to ensure that there is no precipitation. In view of the above:
ORDER [a] The petition is allowed quashing the third respondent's [the Regional Authority] order dated 30.03.2023 [Annexure-K] restoring the petitioner's application for the benefit as aforesaid to be reconsidered. [b] The petitioner is reserved with liberty to file a certified copy of this order with the third respondent within three [3] weeks from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order -8- NC: 2025:KHC:44781 WP No. 11685 of 2023 HC-KAR and the third respondent is called upon to decide on the application as expeditiously as possible but within an outer limit of eight [8] weeks from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order.
Sd/-
(B M SHYAM PRASAD) JUDGE SA ct:sr