UNION OF INDIA AND ANR.versusM/S. SH. RAM RAYONS
- Citation
- 1996 INSC 225
- Decided
- 12 February 1996
- Disposal
- Appeal(s) allowed
Holding
A fee paid under Clause 4(2) of the Imports (Control) Order, 1955 is not refundable unless it falls within the three specific exceptions enumerated in the clause, which were not applicable in the present case.
Summary
The respondent, Mis. Sh. Ram Rayons, applied for a supplementary import licence and paid a fee of Rs.1 lakh under Clause 4(2) of the Imports (Control) Order, 1955. A policy change later prevented the issuance of the licence, prompting the respondent to file a writ petition seeking a refund of the fee. The Delhi High Court ordered a refund with interest, but the Union of India appealed to the Supreme Court. The Court examined the wording of Clause 4(2), which permits refund only when the fee is in excess of the prescribed scale, when no application has been made, or when the fee was paid in error by an exempt applicant. Since none of these exceptions applied, the Court held that the fee could not be refunded. Consequently, the Supreme Court set aside the High Court's refund order and allowed the appeal without costs.
Issues considered
- Whether the fee paid under Clause 4(2) of the Imports (Control) Order, 1955 is refundable when a licence is not granted due to a change in policy.
- Whether the High Court was justified in directing a refund with interest.
Subjects
Judgment
UNION OF INDIA AND ANR. A
v. .
MIS. SH. RAM RAYONS
FEBRUARY 12, 1996
[K. RAMASWAMY AND G.B. PATTANAIK, JJ.] B
Imp01ts (Control) Order, 1955:
Clause 4(2)-Fees on application of licence-Application made for
grant of supplementmy licence for imp01t of certain items-Deposit of C
fees-Due to change of policy licence could not be issued-Writ Petition filed
for direction to refund the amount-High Court directing refund-Held: A
reading of the clause clearly shows that no fee is refundable under any
circumstances except under ce1tain conditions-In the instant case High Court
was not justified in directing refund of the amount.
D
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION : Civil Appeal No. 3635 of
1996.
From the Judgment and Order dated 3.3.94 of the Delhi High Court
in C.W.P. No. 4128 of 1993.
E
D.P. Gupta, Solicitor General, A. Subba Rao and Ms. Sushma Suri
for the Appellants.
P.N. Puri and Atul Nanda for the Respondents.
The following Order of the Court was delivered : F
Leave granted.
We have heard the counsel on both sides.
This appeal by special leave arises from the order made on March
3, 1994 by the Division Bench of the High Court of Delhi in W.P. No. G
4128/93. Admittedly, the respondent made an application for grant of the
supplementary licence for import of certain items and deposited a sum of
Rs. 1 lakh. The Licensing Authority had recommended the name of the
appellant but in the meantime policy had been changed on July 4, 1991.
Consequently, the licence could not be issued. The respondent filed the H
457
458 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [1996] 2 S.C.R.
A writ petition on August 28, 1993 for a direction to refund the amount. The
High Court in the impugned order accordingly directed the refund with
interest at 12% from March 4, 1992. Thus, this appeal by special leave.
Clause 4(2) of Imports (Control) Order 1955 reads as under :
B "4. Fees on Application of Licence : (1) Every application for a
licence shall be made to the appropriate licensing authority.
(2) A fee as indicated in Schedule III shall be paid in respect of
every application in the manner provided in the said Schedule:
c Provided that no fee shall be payable in respect of any application
when made by -
(a) the Central Government, A State Government or any
department or office of the Central Government or State
Government;
D
(b) any local authority for the import of goods required for
its own consumption;
(c) any educational, charitable or missionary institution for
the import of goods required for its own consumption;
E
The fees once received will not be refunded under any circumstan-
ces except:
(i) where the fee has been deposited m excess of the
F prescribed scale;
(ii) where the fee has been deposited but no application has
been made.
(iii) where the fee has been deposited in error but the ap-
G plicant is exempt from payment of licence fee.
Note : Fees paid in respect of Appeals made to the Chief Con- .
troller of imports and Exports and its Regional Licensing
Authorities shall not be refunded under any circumstances."
H A reading thereof clearly indicates that no fee shall be refundable
• •
U.0.1. v. SHRI RAM RAYONS 459
under any circumstance has been except where the fee has been deposited A
in excess of the prescribed scale; where the fee has been deposited but no
application has been made, in other words, though deposit of the amount
was made but no application has been submitted for consideration; or
where the fees has been deposited in error but the applicant is exempt from
payment of the licence fee. Under these circumstances, the High Court was
not justified in directing refund of the amount.
B
The appeal is accordingly allowed. No costs.
G.N. Appeal allowed.
Search Indian case law
Ask in plain English, not just keywords. 25,000 AI words free, no card.