SC: Under Order XXI Rule 102 CPC, A Transferee Pendente Lite Cannot Obstruct Execution of a Decree  ||  SC: RTE Act promotes fraternity and equality by children of judges and vendors studying together  ||  MP High Court: Aadhaar and Voter ID Cards are Not Definitive Proof of Date of Birth  ||  Chhattisgarh HC: Second Marriage During Subsisting First Marriage Void Unless Custom Permits It  ||  Allahabad HC: Will in Favor of Someone Does Not Affect Compassionate Appointment Based on Dependency  ||  MP High Court: Mere Illness of a Family Member, If Improving, is Not Sufficient for Interim Bail  ||  Bombay HC: ?25K Fine for Flying Kites With Nylon Manjha; Parents Must Ensure Responsible Conduct  ||  Delhi High Court: Home State Must be the First Preference For Claiming Insider IFS Cadre Allocation  ||  SC: Hindu Daughter-In-Law Widowed After Her Father-In-Law’s Death is Entitled to Maintenance  ||  SC: Vendor Remains a Necessary Party in Specific Performance Suits Even After Transferring Property    

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