Premium Sugars Vs Union of India (Bombay High Court) – Bombay HC upholds sugar export prohibition, holding private contracts and advance payments create no vested right against a policy issued in public interest.

Sachin Pandey Vs U.O.I. (Allahabad High Court) – Allahabad High Court held that additional conditions for DFIA imports were contrary to binding judgments and dismissed the PIL.

Nanji Nagsi Exports Pvt. Ltd. Vs Union of India (Bombay High Court) – Bombay High Court held that SION Entry E75 permits import of maize without restricting its variety, allowing popcorn maize under the DFIA Scheme.

Nrapen Shanker Acharya son of Shri Narbada Shanker Acharya Vs Union of India (Rajasthan High Court) – The Rajasthan High Court held that policy decisions relating to the Foreign Trade Policy and the Hand Book of Procedure cannot be altered through judicial directions under Article 226. It dismissed the PIL seeking directions to modify the framework governing pre-import and Actual User Conditions.

Shree Renuka Sugars Ltd. Vs Union of India (Gujarat High Court) – The Gujarat High Court held that exporters may apply for RoDTEP benefits even if the claim was not mentioned in the shipping bills. It directed that such omission should not be treated as a waiver or result in rejection of the claim.

Satyendra Packaging Limited Vs Union of India (Gujarat High Court) – The Gujarat High Court held that exporters who exported sugar with the prescribed permission of the Directorate of Sugar were entitled to RoDTEP benefits. It directed the authorities to grant the rebate despite the export policy being classified as restricted.

Aker Powergas Pvt. Ltd. Vs Union of India & Ors. (Bombay High Court) – The Bombay High Court considered a challenge to a demand-cum-show cause notice on the ground that it was issued more than ten years after the alleged transaction. The Court issued notice to the respondents and permitted the petitioner to seek further relief if additional proceedings are initiated.

Reckitt Benckiser India Private Limited Vs Union of India & Ors. (Delhi High Court) – The Delhi High Court set aside DGFT’s communication placing an importer in the “Denied Entity List” after finding violation of natural justice and Section 8 of the FTDR Act. The Court held that such action cannot be taken without proper notice and opportunity of hearing.

Integrated CNC Technologies Pvt. Ltd. Vs Appellate Authority & Zonal Additional Director General of Foreign Trade (Madras High Court) – The Court set aside the DGFT order imposing penalty and customs duty demand for alleged EPCG export obligation default. The matter was remanded after directing the authority to provide the petitioner a personal hearing.

Indus Mercadeo Vs Directorate General of Foreign Trade (Madras High Court) – The court held that when an importer claims that a licence is not required under a notification, authorities must first consider the representation on merits. Customs were directed to provide a hearing and pass a reasoned order before refusing clearance.