No Denial of SHIS Benefit if Zero-Duty Benefit Under EPCG Was Surrendered and Regularized by DGFT | CESTAT

Foreign Trade Policy • News • Case Chronicles

SHIS Benefits
Case Details: Nagreeka Exports Ltd. Versus Commissioner of Customs (Port), Kolkata (2025) 27 Centax 1 (Tri.-Cal)

Judiciary and Counsel Details

  • S/Shri Ashok Jindal, Member (J) & K. Anpazhakan, Member (T)
  • S/Shri Sachin Chitnis & Siddhanth Sriram, Advs., for the Appellant.
  • Shri Faiz Ahmed, Authorized Representative, for the Respondent.

Facts of the Case

The assessee, engaged in textile exports, applied for Status Holder Incentive Scheme (SHIS) benefits for the years 2009-10 to 2012-13. However, with the discontinuation of SHIS, the assessee availed the Zero Duty Export Promotion Capital Goods (EPCG) scheme in 2013-14. Subsequently, the Directorate of Revenue Intelligence (DRI) and the Comptroller and Auditor General (CAG) raised objections, citing the Foreign Trade Policy (FTP) 2009-14, which prohibited simultaneous availing of both benefits. To address this, the Directorate General of Foreign Trade (DGFT) Public Notice No. 30/2016 and Central Board of Excise and Customs (CBEC) Circular No. 45/2016 allowed the surrender of one benefit. The assessee relinquished EPCG benefits, deposited duty with interest, and obtained DGFT approval. Despite this, the Commissioner of Customs (Port), Kolkata, denied SHIS benefits and raised a demand. Aggrieved, the assessee challenged the order before the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT).

CESTAT Held

The Hon’ble CESTAT held that the denial of SHIS benefits was legally unsustainable, as the DGFT and CBEC clarifications expressly permitted the surrender of EPCG benefits to avail SHIS. The assessee’s compliance with the prescribed procedure, including duty payment and DGFT approval, rendered the Customs Department’s refusal without jurisdiction. The Tribunal, therefore, quashed the demand and upheld the assessee’s right to claim SHIS benefits.

List of Cases Cited

List of Departmental Clarification Cited

  • D.G.F.T. Public Notice No. 30/2015-20, dated 8-9-2016 [Paras 2.1, 3, 3.2, 6]
  • C.B.E.C. Circular No. 45/2016-Cus., Dated 23-9-2016 [Paras 2.1, 3, 3.2, 6]

Leave Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Related Stories
CBIC Amends Import Policy for Penicillins and Amoxycillin

Foreign Trade Policy • News • Statutory Scope

January 31, 2026

EU And India Conclude Landmark Free Trade Agreement

Foreign Trade Policy • News • Statutory Scope

January 29, 2026

DGFT Notifies Second Round Of Gold TRQ Allocation Under UAE CEPA

Foreign Trade Policy • News • Statutory Scope

January 27, 2026

DGFT Authorises IACCIA To Issue Non-Preferential COO

Foreign Trade Policy • News • Statutory Scope

January 13, 2026

DGFT Removes Import Restriction on Low Ash Metallurgical Coke

Foreign Trade Policy • News • Statutory Scope

January 7, 2026

DGFT Restricts Import of Low Ash Metallurgical Coke | Notification No. 53/2025-26

Foreign Trade Policy • News • Statutory Scope

January 5, 2026

DGFT Permits Export of 50,000 MT Organic Sugar per Year

Foreign Trade Policy • News • Statutory Scope

December 31, 2025

DGFT Adds SBER Bank to Authorised Gold Importers FY 2025-26

Foreign Trade Policy • News • Statutory Scope

December 23, 2025

DGFT Notifies IMS Procedure for Restricted IT Hardware Imports 2026

Foreign Trade Policy • News • Statutory Scope

December 19, 2025

DGFT Revises SION A-290 UOM for Metformin HCL Inputs

Foreign Trade Policy • News • Statutory Scope

December 15, 2025