SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2025 Supreme(Chh) 249

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
Ramesh Sinha, C.J., Bibhu Datta Guru, J.
M/s Eastman International (A Partnership Concern) - Petitioner
Versus
Union Of India Through Its Secretary, Ministry Of Finance Department Of Revenue – Respondent 
WPT No. 228 of 2023
Decided On : 12-12-2025 

Advocates Appeared:
For the Petitioner:Mr. Ajay Aggarwal, Mr. Naveen Bindal, Ms. Katyayani Vishnupriya, Advocate
For the Respondent:Ms. Anmol Sharma, Standing Counsel, Mr. Anumeh Shrivastava, Advocate, Mr. Anumeh Shrivastava, Advocate

The condition requiring irrevocable Letters of Credit for export duty exemption does not apply to exporters who do not utilize this mechanism, ensuring compliance with constitutional rights.

Headnote:(A) Constitution of India - Articles 14, 19(1)(g), and 21 - Customs Act, 1962 - Notification No. 49/2023-Customs and No. 50/2023-Customs - Export Duty on Rice - The petitioner challenged the legality of export duty and conditions for exemption, specifically arguing compliance with applicable conditions for exemption - The court examined whether the condition relating to irrevocable Letters of Credit (LoC) was applicable to the petitioner, who exports without LoC, and found that imposing such a condition was arbitrary and unconstitutional. (Paras 22-34)

(B) Writ of Prohibition - The Court held the second condition of exemption relating to LoC is not mandatory for exporters not utilizing LoC, thereby entitling the petitioner to a refund of the export duty deposited. (Paras 22-34)

Facts of the case:
The petitioner, a recognized export house, contended that it fulfilled the exemption requirements despite the government imposing a 20% export duty. The petitioner had paid this duty while asserting that it should not have been required to meet the second condition regarding LoCs. The respondent Customs Department claimed both sub-conditions of an exemption must be satisfied simultaneously.

Findings of Court:
The Court concluded that the second condition regarding LoCs does not apply to exporters who do not use them, affirming the petitioner's entitlement to a refund of the previously paid export duty.

Issues: The core issue was whether imposing a condition for LoCs affects the applicability of the exemption concerning the export duty on rice, and whether the petitioner was entitled to the exemption under the applicable notifications.

Ratio Decidendi: The Court articulated that the purpose of the exemption is to facilitate exporters, emphasizing the importance of practical compliance over technical conditions. The insistence on a LoC from a petitioner who does not utilize it was deemed both unreasonable and a violation of fundamental rights under the Constitution.

Result: The writ petition was allowed, with a direction to refund the export duty deposited along with interest.

JUDGMENT :

Ramesh Sinha, CJ.

1 Heard Mr. Ajay Agrawal, Mr. Naveen Bindal and Ms. Katyayani Vishnupriya, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Ms. Anmol Sharma, learned counsel for the respondents No. 1 and 2 as well as Mr. Anumeh Shrivastava, learned counsel for the respondent No. 3.

2 By this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner seeks for the following relief(s):

“10.1 This Hon'ble Court may be pleased to issue a writ of prohibition or appropriate writ, order or direction in nature thereof, prohibiting Respondents from collecting any export duty on export of Rice, without insisting upon compliance of second condition of condition no. 6 of exemption Notification No. 50/2023-Customs dated 25.08.2023, in the circumstances so warranting; and

10.2 Direct return of deposit of Rs. 2,01,28,295/- already made by the Petitioner "under protest" and "without prejudice" with appropriate interest thereon, after holding the Petitioner having satisfied the condition for exemption being condition no. 6 under exemption Notification No. 50/2023-Customs dated 25.08.2023, in the circumstances so warranting; and

10.3 In the alternative, this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to issue a writ of certiorari appropriate writ, order or direction in nature thereof, quashing second condition of condition no. 6 of exemption Notification No. 50/2023-Customs dated 25.08.2023, in the circumstances so warranting, as being wholly arbitrary, unjust, invalid, irrational, capricious as being violative of Article 14, 21 and Article 19(1)(g) of the Constitution of India; and

10.4 For such further and other reliefs as the nature and circumstances of the case may require;”

3 The facts, as projected by the petitioner are that the petitioner is engaged, inter alia, in the trading of rice, cycle parts, ceramic tiles etc. The petitioner, inter alia, exports the rice out of India. It has been exporting rice out of India since the year 2012. The petitioner is Government of India recognized "3-star export house". The export of rice from India happens through various means, in which export proceeds are realized through different methods. Some of the common known methods of realization of export proceeds are through "documentary collections", "open account", "escrow account", "credit cards", "consignment transfer", "wire transfer", "cash in advance", "cash upon delivery" etc., to name a few. The export can also be made through "Letter of Credit" (for short, the LoC). Each of the aforesaid method of realization of export proceeds are legitimate and valid in the eyes of law and there is no prohibition or restriction in this regard, on any of the methods employed. It is also possible that a mix of aforesaid methods of realization of sale proceeds are employed in the trade. The petitioner exports the rice and realizes the exports proceeds by the methods of "cash upon delivery", which it has been using since the year 2012. In between 14.08.2023 to 25.08.2023, the consignments of parboiled rice of the Petitioner, which is meant for export had entered the customs station of ICD CONCOR Naya Raipur, within the State of Chhattisgarh. In relation to the said consignments, no order permitting clearance for export, known as "Let Export Order" has been issued by the "Proper Officer appointed under the Customs Act, 1962. This is undisputed between the parties. The Central Government, Ministry of Finance (Department of Revenue) issued a Notification bearing No. 49/2023-Customs dated 25.08.2023 under Section 8(1) of the Customs Tariff Act, 1975 levying export duty of 20% on export of parboiled rice falling under Chapter Heading 1006 30 10 of the Customs Tariff Act, 1975. This was done by inserting an entry being SL No. 6C in the Second Schedule to the Customs Tariff Act, 1975, which schedules the item, which are subject to export duty. Aforesaid Notification came into force on 25.08.2023 (Annexure P-1). On the heels of the aforesaid Notification came another Not

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top