#Foreign Trade Policy

The Bombay High Court held that import date under FTP is shipment date not arrival upholding Ganesh Das Bhojraj principle and that FTP restrictions apply only to goods dispatched after notification benefiting importers whose goods arrived before notice.

Gujarat HC struck down notifications that retroactively stripped exporters of Service Exports from India Scheme benefits, ruling that Section 5 of the Foreign Trade Act cannot be applied retrospectively. The decision safeguards vested export incentives for firms relying on SEIS.

Bombay HC affirmed the May 2026 notification barring sugar exports, holding that no vested right or legitimate expectation arises from a temporary export policy. The ruling keeps the export ban in force, affecting all domestic sugar exporters.

CESTAT Chennai rules that 100% Export Oriented Units (EOUs) destroying duty-free inputs under FTP Para 6.15 are not liable for Customs or Excise duty, even pre-2015. The Tribunal held the 2015 amendments clarificatory and retrospective, shielding EOUs from duty demands, interest, and penalties for obsolete inputs destroyed with due intimation to authorities.

CESTAT Kolkata invalidates DGFT's use of public notices to impose actual user conditions on Transferable Duty-Free Import Authorizations, affirming that only notifications issued in the Official Gazette have legal force to amend Foreign Trade Policy terms. This ruling protects importers and transferees from retroactive administrative overreach and reinforces the hierarchy of delegated legislation under the Foreign Trade (Development and Regulation) Act.

CESTAT Kolkata holds that Export Obligation Discharge Certificates (EODCs) issued by DGFT are binding and conclusive evidence of export obligation fulfilment under FTP schemes. The ruling sets aside a ₹14.97 crore customs demand, reinforcing legal certainty for exporters and importers relying on DGFT authorisations.

ITAT Delhi rules that export incentives under the Focus Product Scheme qualify as capital receipts, exempt from income tax. The decision reinforces the precedent that subsidies tied to capital assets or business expansion are non-taxable, offering relief to exporters facing tax additions on such benefits.

Madras High Court rules that customs authorities cannot penalize brokers for MEIS misclassification if DGFT has issued and not revoked the scrips, reinforcing strict jurisdictional boundaries under foreign trade law. The ruling shields customs brokers from liability absent explicit DGFT action, impacting enforcement under the MEIS scheme.

CESTAT Ahmedabad rules that imports of Technical Grade Urea through State Trading Enterprises under high sea sales do not violate the Foreign Trade Policy, even without a DGFT license. The tribunal set aside confiscation and penalty orders, clarifying that such transactions are permissible under Section 111(d) of the Customs Act, impacting importers relying on high sea sales mechanisms.

Supreme Court holds that delegated legislation like MIP notifications only become enforceable upon Official Gazette publication, not upon website upload.

Supreme Court holds that delegated legislation like MIP notifications only become effective upon Official Gazette publication, not website upload.