Case Law Details
Simplex Infrastructures Ltd. Vs. Union of India (Madras High Court)
Joint DGFT has no powers to review his own orders in view of Section 16 of the FTDR Act. There can be no review of an earlier refund except in accordance with the provision of Section 16 of the FTDR Act, which only permits the DGFT or the Central Government (in case the original order was by the DGFT) to exercise the power of review
Section 16 of the FTDR Act empowers the Director General to review any decision or order made by the Joint Director of Foreign The power of review of any decision or order is only under Section 16.
As and when the Joint Director General of Foreign Trade,had issued the EPCG licence and the Export Obligation Discharge Certificate, he becomes “functus officio” and if at all, such an order of the second respondent is to be reviewed, the same can be done only by the Director General, as provided under Section 16.
Insofar as the ground of limitation raised by the petitioner is concerned, Section 16 empowers the Director General to review the order, within a period of two years from the date of the decision or the order Apparently, all the impugned notices in the aforesaid Writ Petitions are beyond the period of two years. As a matter of fact, the notices are after a long delay between 8 to 10 years and there is absolutely no explanation for this inordinate delay in the proposal to review the order. The only ground raised by the learned Additional Solicitor General, is that, the two years period prescribed under Section 16 would commence from the date of the demand notices. I am unable to contemplate as to how such date of reckoning could be construed from the proviso to Section 16, when it is unambiguously provided that two years period will commence from the date of decision or order which is sought to be revised.
Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.
