SC: Suit Alleging Coercion or Undue Influence Cannot be Rejected under Order VII Rule 11 CPC  ||  Cal HC: Once ED Attachment is Confirmed, Challenge Becomes Academic; PMLA Remedy Must be Pursued  ||  MP HC: Pen-Drive Evidence Cannot be Introduced At a Late Trial Stage Without Proof or Relevance  ||  Calcutta HC: Employee Can't be Stopped From Joining Rival Post-Resignation; Trade Secrets Protected  ||  Calcutta HC: Banks Must Provide Forensic Audit Report Before Calling an Account Fraudulent  ||  Del HC: Woman Cannot Demand Re-Entry to Abandoned Matrimonial Home if Alternate Accommodation Exists  ||  Calcutta HC: Land Acquisition For Industrial Park is Public Purpose; Leasing to Industry is Valid  ||  Patna HC: PwD Recruitment Must Comply With RPwD Act; Executive Resolutions Cannot Override the Law  ||  Madras HC: Individuals Facing Criminal Trial Must Get Court Permission Even to Renew Passports  ||  Calcutta HC: Demolition Orders Cannot be Challenged under Article 226 if a Statutory Appeal Exists    

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