w w w . L a w y e r S e r v i c e s . i n



M/s. Sri Lakshmi Saraswathi Spintex Ltd., Represented by its Managing Director, C.S. Aditya Praveen v/s Director General of Foreign Trade, Policy Relaxation Committee, New Delhi & Others


Company & Directors' Information:- SRI LAKSHMI SARASWATHI SPINTEX LIMITED [Active] CIN = U17120TN2010PLC078474

Company & Directors' Information:- J S SPINTEX LIMITED [Active] CIN = U17290PB2012PLC036595

Company & Directors' Information:- R P SPINTEX LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U17110HR1990PLC031121

Company & Directors' Information:- K K SPINTEX INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U17114AP2008PTC060901

Company & Directors' Information:- G C SPINTEX LIMITED [Active] CIN = U17219PB1999PLC022951

Company & Directors' Information:- S S SPINTEX LIMITED [Active] CIN = U18101PB1998PLC021525

Company & Directors' Information:- ADITYA LIMITED [Active] CIN = U45400DL2012PLC231460

Company & Directors' Information:- I TRADE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U67120TN1999PLC043813

Company & Directors' Information:- PRAVEEN INDIA LTD . [Active] CIN = L21029WB1983PLC036326

Company & Directors' Information:- INDIA SPINTEX LIMITED [Active] CIN = U17113DL1999PLC098470

Company & Directors' Information:- B R SPINTEX PVT LTD [Active] CIN = U74899HR1994PTC032294

Company & Directors' Information:- TRADE INDIA LTD [Active] CIN = U51909PB1982PLC004822

Company & Directors' Information:- SPINTEX PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U51505DL1974PTC007242

Company & Directors' Information:- R P TRADE PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U51909AS1999PTC005646

Company & Directors' Information:- D K SPINTEX PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U74899DL1995PTC069469

Company & Directors' Information:- A R TRADE IN PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U51909AS1999PTC005710

Company & Directors' Information:- S 3 M TRADE PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U74900WB2013PTC193812

Company & Directors' Information:- ADITYA AND COMPANY (INDIA) PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U27107RJ2004PTC019073

Company & Directors' Information:- J B SPINTEX PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U18101DL2005PTC139223

Company & Directors' Information:- ADITYA SPINTEX PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U17121MP1996PTC011462

Company & Directors' Information:- PRAVEEN & COMPANY PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U99999DL1999PTC098397

Company & Directors' Information:- B H SPINTEX LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U17290PB2011PLC035531

Company & Directors' Information:- C TRADE (INDIA) PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U74900KA2008PTC045372

Company & Directors' Information:- I-W TRADE PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U93030MH2012PTC233832

Company & Directors' Information:- U M TRADE PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U67190MH2011PTC224523

Company & Directors' Information:- CS INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U72200DL2013FTC250625

Company & Directors' Information:- D P M TRADE PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U28112MP2004PTC016527

Company & Directors' Information:- SARASWATHI CORPORATION PRIVATE LIMITED [Dissolved] CIN = U74999KL1901PTC001066

    Writ Petition Nos. 21634 & 21636 of 2017 & W.M.P. Nos. 22648, 22649, 22650 & 22651 of 2017

    Decided On, 16 August 2017

    At, High Court of Judicature at Madras

    By, THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE T.S. SIVAGNANAM

    For the Petitioner: Adinarayana Rao, Advocate. For the Respondents: R1 to R3, Babu Rangasamy, CGSC, T.V. Krishnamachari, SPCCG, R4, R. Hemalatha, SPC.



Judgment Text

(Prayer: Writ Petitions filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for the issuance of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to call for the records of the third respondent pertaining to File Nos.04/83/165/00922/AM15; 04/83/165/00648/AM15, both dated 29.05.2017 placing the petitioner company into denied entity list, quash the same as illegal, arbitrary and consequently, to direct the first respondent to consider the representations, dated 05.01.2015, 18.05.2017 and 27.07.2017; 11.06.2014, 08.10.2014, 18.05.2017 and 27.07.2017 and extend time granted vide Advanced Authorization Nos.0410139033, dated 23.08.2012; 041013784, dated 04.07.2012, respectively, by another six months, in order to fulfill the Export Obligation.)

Common Order:

1. Heard Mr.Adinarayana Rao, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, Mr.Babu Rangasamy, learned CGSC, Mr.T.V.Krishnamachari, learned SPCGC and Mrs.R.Hemalatha, learned counsels, who accepts notice for the respective respondents, in both these petitions. With the consent of the respective learned counsels appearing for both sides, the writ petitions themselves are taken up for final disposal, at the admission stage itself.

2. The petitioner, in both these writ petitions, seeks for the issuance of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to quash the communication sent by the third respondent, directing the petitioner to regularize the entire import to the Customs, as per para 4.49 of HBP 2015-2020, immediately, by placing the petitioner unit under DEL.

3. The petitioner was requested to remove the above said deficiency, within a period of thirty days from the date of issuance of the said order, otherwise, the petitioner's case will be treated as closed. The petitioner, while admitting that they failed to fulfill the export obligations within the time permitted, i.e., 31.03.2014, approached the respondents, by way of representations dated 11.06.2014, 08.10.2014, 05.01.2015, 18.05.2017 and 27.07.2017. The representation, dated 05.01.2015, does not specify the reasons, due to which, the petitioners were unable to fulfill their export obligations within the time permitted.

4. However, I find that, in the representation dated 18.05.2017, which has been given to the first respondent with the copy marked to the second respondent and the further representation dated 22.05.2017 given to the second respondent, on receipt of the show cause notice, dated 03.05.2017, it appears that certain reasons have been set-out by the petitioner, for not being able to fulfill the export obligations on or before 31.03.2014. However, the sufficiency or insufficiency of the reasons have to be tested by the second respondent and it is not open for this Court to consider the same, at this juncture.

5. Further, it is seen that the petitioner has given a representation to the first respondent on 27.07.2017, by enclosing certain Purchase Orders, which have been placed upon them for supply of garments and therefore, the petitioner's case is that, if sufficient time is granted, they would be in a position to fulfill their export obligations and the non-fulfillment is not due to any malafide reasons, but for circumstances beyond their control.

6. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, in both the writ petitions, pointed out that when the petitioner requested for adjournment of the adjudication of the show cause notice, by giving a representation dated 22.05.2017, their Manager was directed to make an endorsement in the very same representation stating as if the entire duty will be paid within 90 days, otherwise, the respondents / Department may take action under the Foreign Trade Development and Regulation Act; according to the petitioner, their Manager had no other option except to accede to the dictates of the Officer in the given facts and circumstances, but that cannot be an estoppel on the part of the petitioner in pursuing their claim for extension.

7. The submission made by the learned counsel for the petitioner, in this regard, is acceptable, as any endorsement made by an employee of the petitioner, while seeking for an adjournment of the adjudication of the show cause notice, cannot forfeit the right of the petitioner to plead for extension of time. Therefore, in all fairness, the second respondent should consider the petitioner's request for extension made vide various representations, referred to above.

8. Accordingly, there will be a direction to the second respondent to consider the petitioner

Please Login To View The Full Judgment!

9;s representation, dated 22.05.2017, seeking extension of time, examine the bonafides of the representations in accordance with the relevant regulations and pass a speaking order, on merits and in accordance with law, within a period of two months, from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. Till then, no coercive action shall be initiated against the petitioner. 9. With the above directions, these writ petitions stand disposed of. No costs. Consequently, the connected WMPs are closed.
O R