The Foreign Trade (Development and Regulation) Act, 1992
Section 16. Review.
The Foreign Trade (Development and Regulation) Act, 1992
Bare Act
1 [16. Review.--The Central Government, in the case of any decision or order made by the Director General, or the Director General in the case of any decision or order made by any officer subordinate to him, may on its or his own motion or otherwise, call for and examine the records of any proceeding, for the purpose of satisfying itself or himself, as the case may be, as to the correctness, legality or propriety of such decision or order and make such orders thereon as may be deemed fit:
Provided that no decision or order shall be varied under this section so as to prejudicially affect any person unless such person--
(a) has, within a period of two years from the date of such decision or order, received a notice to showcause why such decision or order shall not be varied; and
(b) has been given a reasonable opportunity of making representation and, if he so desires, of being heard in his defence.]
Judgments on Section 16
- M/S. Unilink Pharma Private Limited vs The Zonal Additional Director General Of Foreign Trade — Madras High Court, 29 Apr 2026. Where a statutory review petition under Section 16 of the FTDR Act, 1992 lies pending before the DGFT, the High Court under Article 226 may, without disturbing the original or appellate orders, direct its disposal on…
- Adani Gangavaram Port Limited (Agpl) vs Union Of India — Telangana High Court, 8 Jan 2026. A policy circular ultra vires the FTDR Act—amending the FTP without a Section 5 notification—is a nullity once quashed and absent any stay, so all proceedings founded on it, including Section 28AAA duty recovery, must…
- Tukaram Bhat vs Director General Of Foreign Trade — Delhi High Court, 22 Apr 2025. A director cannot be fastened with personal liability under Section 11(2) of the FTDR Act for a company's export-obligation default merely because he was (or was a whole-time) director; specific allegations of his duty…
- Union Of India vs Agricas Llp — Supreme Court of India, 26 Aug 2020. Section 9A of the FTDR Act does not elide or negate the power of the Central Government to impose restrictions on imports under sub-section (2) to Section 3, so quantitative restrictions notified under Section 3(2) are…
- M/S. Rain Ch Carbon Vizag Ltd vs Office Of The Additional Director General Of Foreign Trade, Hyderabad And Others. — Telangana High Court, 2 May 2025. An Advance Authorisation under the Foreign Trade Policy extends to physical exports including supply to SEZ units, and an authority cannot refuse it by invoking a policy condition that contradicts the parent CAQM order…
- Ajit Gulabchand vs Director General Of Foreign Trade — Delhi High Court, 22 Apr 2025. A director cannot be held personally liable for a company's non-fulfilment of export obligations under the FTDR Act unless a Section 14 notice specifically alleges the duty or obligation cast on him and his conscious…