Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

Delhi High Court - Orders

Archer And Angel vs Union Of India And Anr on 25 April, 2023

Author: Prathiba M. Singh

Bench: Prathiba M. Singh

                          $~4
                          *     IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
                          +                        W.P.(C) 3483/2022
                                ARCHER AND ANGEL                                 ..... Petitioner
                                                   Through: Ms. Malvika Trivedi, Sr. Adv with
                                                               Mr. Vishal Malhotra & Ms. Sukanya
                                                               Basu, Advs. (M: 9810111610)
                                                   versus
                                UNION OF INDIA AND ANR                           ..... Respondents
                                                   Through: Mr. Asheesh Jain, CGSC with Ms.
                                                               Ankita Kedia, Advocate for R-1 & 2.
                                                               (M: 9811125100)
                                CORAM:
                                JUSTICE PRATHIBA M. SINGH
                                            ORDER

% 25.04.2023

1. This hearing has been done through hybrid mode.

2. The Petitioner seeks to challenge the orders dated 7th January, 2022, 10th January, 2022 and 21st January, 2022 passed by the Respondent No.2 - Additional Director General of Foreign Trade by which the applications of the Petitioners for issuance of Service Exports India Scheme (SEIS) was rejected by the Respondent No.2.

3. The brief background is that the Petitioner is a law firm providing legal services and consultancy to domestic and foreign clients in India since 1999. The Petitioner had obtained the Import Export Code ("IEC") AAGFA7581G on 14th September, 2021. According to the Petitioner, upon acquiring IEC, the Petitioner wanted to obtain the advantages in terms of the foreign trade policy for issuance of SEIS i.e., duty scrips. It made multiple applications for the said purpose, however, the same were rejected on the ground that on the date when the services were provided, the Petitioner did not have the IEC.

4. Ld. Sr. counsel for the Petitioner relies upon the decision of the Division Court of this Court in W.P. (C) 9084/2020 tilted Hyatt India Consultancy Pvt. Ltd. v. Union of India & Ors. 2022/DHC/005328 and connected matters wherein under similar circumstances, the Court has taken on record the statement of the Union of India that the Government cannot insist upon IEC at the time of export in view of the amendment issued on 8th August, 2018 in paragraph 2.05 Foreign Trade Policy 2015-2020.

5. Ld. counsel for the Respondent also submits that this decision would have an effect on the applications made by the Petitioners. Reliance is also placed upon the judgment of the High Court of Bombay in Smarte Solutions Pvt. Ltd. v. Union of India & Anr., W.P. (C) 503/2021.

6. Considering the fact that the impugned orders passed rejecting the Petitioner's applications were prior to the decision of the Division Bench of this Court, let the applications made by the Petitioners be considered afresh by the Respondents in terms of the above two decisions.

7. The period of pendency of the present petitions shall not come in the way of calculating limitation qua the applications of the Petitioner. However, considering the date of the applications and the period for which the duty scrips are being sought, the issue as to whether they are barred by limitation is left open.

8. Let the reconsideration be done within a period of three months.

9. With these observations, the present petition, along with all pending applications, is disposed of.

PRATHIBA M. SINGH, J.

APRIL 25, 2023 dj/kt Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:DHIRENDER KUMAR Signing Date:26.04.2023 17:22:49