Calling the Situation Grim, the Supreme Court Takes Suo Motu Cognizance of Delays in NCLT Approvals  ||  Supreme Court: Admission of a Claim by a Resolution Professional is Not Debt Acknowledgment  ||  Supreme Court: Public Figures Must Exercise Caution as Their Words Have Consequences in Society  ||  SC: State Must Act as a Model Employer, Criticising the Union For Not Regularising ISRO Workers  ||  J&K&L High Court: Minor Minerals Have Major Environmental Impacts and Must be Regulated  ||  Del HC: Unexplained Money Received by Public Servant is Not Bribery Without Proof of Official Favour  ||  Del HC: There is No Absolute Bar on Granting Co-Convicts Parole/Furlough Together in Suitable Cases  ||  Bom HC: LARR Authority Can Examine Limitation Issues in Land Acquisition References under 2013 Act  ||  MP HC: Long-Serving Employees Cannot Be Denied Regularisation by Retrospective Statutory Amendments  ||  J&K&L HC: Routine Challenges to Lok Adalat Awards Defeat Their Purpose of Quick Dispute Resolution    

Director General of Foreign Trade and Ors. v. Kanak Exports and Ors. - (Supreme Court) (27 Oct 2015)

Withdraw export benefits only prospectively in case of accrued vested rights

MANU/SC/1258/2015

Civil

The Supreme Court has ruled that amendments to the government’s Target Plus Scheme, to increase exports of certain goods, cannot be applied retrospectively. The Scheme was aimed at encouraging certain “thrust sectors”, like textile, electronic hardware and automotive component, entitling exporters to duty credits. Also included was the gems and jewellery industry, which was subsequently removed from the list for misuse of benefit; and the government purported to recover benefit granted to such exporters retrospectively. The Court noted that exporters of gems and jewellery had a vested right to avail duty credit, and reducing credit that could be accumulated subsequent to its accumulation effectively operated the amendment retrospectively.

Relevant : Amendments in EXIM Policy 2002-2007 MANU/DGFT/0018/2004 State of Madhya Pradesh and Ors. v. Nandlal Jaiswal and Ors. MANU/SC/0034/1986 BALCO Employees Union (Regd.) v. Union of India and Ors. MANU/SC/0779/2001

Tags : TARGET PLUS   DUTY CREDIT   AMENDMENT   RETROSPECTIVE  

Share :        

Disclaimer | Copyright 2026 - All Rights Reserved