AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Manmohan, J.—The present writ petitions have been filed challenging the order dated 28th December, 2012 whereby the Director General of Foreign Trade refused to entertain the appeals filed by the petitioners u/s 15(1)(b) of the Foreign Trade (Development and Regulation) Act, 1992 (for short "Act, 1992") against rejection of petitioners? applications for Terminal Excise Duty refund. The Director General of Foreign Trade was of the opinion that the orders impugned before him did not refuse to grant or renew or suspend or cancel a license u/s 9(5) of the Act, 1992.
The relevant portion of Section 15(1) of the Act, 1992 reads as under:-
Appeal.-(1) Any person aggrieved by any decision or order made by the Adjudicating Authority under this Act may prefer an appeal:-
(a) where the decision or order has been made by the Director General, to the Central Government;....
In the opinion of this Court, the scope and width of Section 15(1) of the Act, 1992 is extremely wide and the petitioners are certainly aggrieved persons at whose instance an appeal would be maintainable.
The present writ petitions are allowed to the extent that the impugned orders dated 23rd August, 2013 are set aside and the matters are remanded back to the Director General of Foreign Trade to decide the matters afresh. All rights and contentions of the parties are left open.
The Director General of Foreign Trade is directed to decide the appeals as expeditiously as possible preferably within a period of six weeks. Order dasti under the signature of Court Master.