M/S Sunway Construction Sdn Bhd vs Union Of India on 10 January, 2023

[Cites 3, Cited by 0]

Karnataka High Court

M/S Sunway Construction Sdn Bhd vs Union Of India on 10 January, 2023

Bench: Jyoti Mulimani

                           1




IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

       DATED THIS THE 10TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2023

                        BEFORE

        THE HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE JYOTI MULIMANI

       WRIT PETITION No.876 OF 2015 (GM-RES)

BETWEEN:

M/S.SUNWAY CONSTRUCTION SDN BHD
NO.20, 2ND FLOOR, UNIWORTH PLAZA
SANKEY ROAD
BANGALORE - 560 020
REPRESENTED BY SURESH KUMAR.               ...PETITIONER

(BY SRI.SANDEEP HUILGOL., ADVOCATE)

AND:

1.     UNION OF INDIA
       REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY
       MINISTRY OF COMMERCE & INDUSTRY
       UDYOG BHAWAN
       NEW DELHI - 110 007.

2.     THE DIRECTOR GENERAL OF FOREIGN TRADE
       UDYOG BHAWAN, MAULANA AZAD ROAD
       NEW DELHI - 110 011.

3.     THE DEPUTY DIRECTORATE GENERAL OF
       FOREIGN TRADE
       UDYOG BHAWAN, MAULANA AZAD ROAD
       NEW DELHI - 110 011.

4.     THE JOINT DIRECTOR GENERAL OF
       FOREIGN TRADE
       KENDRIYA SADAN
       6TH FLOOR, 'C' & 'E' WING
       2ND BLOCK, 17TH MAIN ROAD
                                 2




     KORAMANGALA
     BANGALORE - 560 034.                        ...RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI. SHANTHI BHUSHAN., ASG FOR R1;
      SRI.V.C.JAGANNATH., ADVOCATE FOR R2 TO 4)

     THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226
AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO
QUASH THE LETTERS BEARING FILE NO.07/083/081/TED
DBK/MISC/AM14 DATED:10.07.2013 ISSUED BY RESPONDENT
NO.4 AND 01/92/180/47/AM-14/PC-VI DATED:20.10.2014 BY
RESPONDENT NO.3, ETC.

     THIS WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY
HEARING 'B' GROUP, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE
FOLLOWING:
                         ORDER

Sri.Sandeep Huilgol., learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri.V.C.Jagannath., learned counsel for respondents 2 to 4 have appeared in person.

The petitioners have invoked the writ jurisdiction under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, to issue a writ of certiorari to quash the letters bearing No.07/083/081/TED-DBK/MISC/AM14/27 dated 10.07.2013 issued by the fourth respondent vide Annexure-A and No.01/92/180/47/AM-14/PC-VI/216 dated 20.10.2014 issued by the third respondent vide Annexure-B and also sought for Mandamus directing respondents 3 & 4 to 3 refund the Terminal Excise Duty (TED) paid by the petitioner at the time of the procurement of goods along with interest.

Sri.Sandeep Huilgol., learned counsel for the petitioner in presenting his arguments, submitted that the Hon'ble Apex Court in SANDOZ PRIVATE LIMITED Vs. UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS reported in 2022 SCC ONLINE SC 10, has formulated certain conditions for refund of Terminal Excise Duty to an Export Oriented Undertaking (E.O.U). He argued that the Apex Court in the above case has ordered a refund of TED. In the present case, the petitioner has made an application for refund of TED but the same has been dishonored. Hence, he submitted that a direction may be issued to the fourth respondent to reconsider the application for a refund of the TED in view of the decision of the Apex Court.

Sri.V.C.Jagannath., learned counsel appearing on behalf of respondents 2 to 4 submits that appropriate order may be passed.

Heard the contentions urged on behalf of the respective parties and perused the writ papers and Annexures with utmost care.

I have also perused the decision of the Apex Court referred to supra with care.

There is no dispute that the petitioner has moved an application for a refund of TED and the same has been rejected. But in view of the decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court, this Court deem it appropriate to direct the Joint Director General of Foreign Trade, Bangalore - fourth Respondent to re-consider the application filed by petitioner for refund of TED paid by the petitioner at the time procurement of goods along with interest in terms of the decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court referred to supra within four weeks from the date of receipt of the certified copy of this order.

In the last resort, Sri.Sandeep Huilgol., learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner may 5 be granted liberty to put forth his case before the Authority.

Submission is noted.

Liberty is reserved for the petitioner to put forth his contentions before the Authority. The contentions of the respective parties are kept open.

Accordingly, the Writ Petition is disposed of.

Sd/-

JUDGE bnv

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Karnataka High Court