Supreme Court Restrains Diamond Exporters from Importing Dry Fruits under Additional Licences — Upholds Import Policy Restrictions.

In Favour of Prosecution
  • 0
Judgement Image
Font size:
Print

Case Note & Summary

The case involved a challenge by the Indo Afghan Chambers of Commerce against the grant of additional licences to diamond exporters for importing dry fruits under the Import Policy 1985-88. The petitioners contended that the goods sought to be imported were prohibited under the existing Import Policy and that the diamond exporters were not entitled to import dry fruits as they did not qualify as dealers in that trade. The respondents argued that they were importing dry fruits as raw materials for processing and that the import was permissible under the policy. The court analyzed the provisions of the Import Policy, particularly the distinction between consumer goods and raw materials, and concluded that dry fruits, being classified as consumer goods, could not be imported under the Additional Licences held by the diamond exporters. The court emphasized that the diamond exporters did not meet the criteria for being considered dealers in dry fruits and thus were not entitled to the advantages of the policy. Ultimately, the court allowed the writ petition, restraining the diamond exporters from importing dry fruits during the specified period under the Additional Licences. The decision underscored the importance of adhering to the classifications and restrictions set forth in the Import Policy. The court also addressed the maintainability of the writ petition under Article 32, asserting that interim orders cannot infringe upon the fundamental rights of the petitioners. The appeal against the Bombay High Court's order was allowed, reinforcing the restrictions on the import of dry fruits by the diamond exporters.

Headnote

A) Import Policy - Additional Licences - Restriction on Import of Dry Fruits - Import Policy 1985-88 - The court held that diamond exporters cannot import dry fruits under Additional Licences as they are not dealers engaged in the trade of stocking and selling dry fruits, and dry fruits are classified as consumer goods, thus excluded from import under the relevant policy provisions. (Paras 94-97).

Subscribe to unlock Headnote Subscribe Now

Issue of Consideration

Whether diamond exporters are entitled to import dry fruits under Additional Licences granted to them under the Import Policy.

Subscribe to unlock Issue of Consideration Subscribe Now

Final Decision

The court allowed the writ petition, restraining the diamond exporters from importing dry fruits during the period 1985-88 under the Additional Licences granted to them. The appeal against the Bombay High Court's order was also allowed, setting aside the previous judgment and reinforcing the restrictions on the import of dry fruits.

Law Points

  • Import Policy
  • Additional Licences
  • Open General Licence
  • Consumer Goods
  • Agricultural Origin
  • Writ Petition under Article 32
Subscribe to unlock Law Points Subscribe Now

Case Details

1986 LawText (SC) (05) 24

Writ Petition No. 199 of 1986 with Civil Appeal No. 664 of 1986

1986-05-15

R.S. Pathak, Sabyasachi Mukharji

1986 AIR 1567, 1986 SCR (3) 79, 1986 SCC (3) 352, 1986 SCALE (1) 1290

V.M. Tarkunde, Rajiv Datta, B. Datta, Soli J. Sorabji, K.K. Venugopal, A.G. Ganguli, A. Subba Rao, Miss Kutty Kumarmangalam, C.V. Subba Rao, Harish Salve, K.R. Nagaraja, B.R. Agarwala, M.M. Jayakar, Miss V. Menon, F.S. Nariman, A.B. Diwan, P.H. Parekh, Uday Lalit

Indo Afghan Chambers of Commerce

Union of India & Others

Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more) Subscribe Now

Nature of Litigation

Challenge against the grant of additional licences for importing dry fruits.

Remedy Sought

Petitioners sought to restrain diamond exporters from importing dry fruits.

Filing Reason

Alleged violation of Import Policy by granting additional licences to diamond exporters.

Previous Decisions

High Court had allowed the diamond exporters to clear imported consignments.

Issues

Entitlement of diamond exporters to import dry fruits under Additional Licences Classification of dry fruits as consumer goods

Submissions/Arguments

Petitioners argued that dry fruits are prohibited under the Import Policy and diamond exporters are not entitled to import them. Respondents contended that they import dry fruits as raw materials for processing and are entitled to do so under the policy.

Ratio Decidendi

Diamond exporters holding Additional Licences are not entitled to import dry fruits as they do not qualify as dealers in that trade, and dry fruits are classified as consumer goods under the Import Policy, thus excluded from import under the relevant provisions.

Judgment Excerpts

The diamond exporters cannot be regarded as dealers engaged in the trade of stocking and selling dry fruits. Dry fruits must be regarded as consumer goods of agricultural origin. An interim order cannot defeat the fundamental rights of the petitioners.

Procedural History

The petitioners filed a writ petition under Article 32 challenging the grant of additional licences to diamond exporters. The Bombay High Court had previously allowed the diamond exporters to clear imported consignments, which was contested by the petitioners.

Acts & Sections

  • Import Policy: 1985-88, Appendix 2 Part B, Appendix 6
  • Constitution of India: Article 32
Subscribe to unlock full Legal Analysis Subscribe Now
Related Judgement
Supreme Court Supreme Court Dismisses State's Appeal in Sales Tax Exemption Case — Entitlement to Exemption Established. The court found that the expression 'for use' in the exemption clause meant 'intended for use' under Section 5(2)(a)(iv) of the Punjab Genera...
Related Judgement
High Court Bombay High Court Quashes FIR in Rape Case Due to Consensual Relationship Between Engaged Couple. Court holds that sexual intercourse between engaged parties with promise of marriage does not constitute rape under Section 376 IPC if consent is volunt...