CHOKSI TUBE COMPANY LIMITED Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) W.P. (C) 1583/ 1986.

(2.) The writ petitioners imported stainless steel strips. The stainless steel strips arrived at Bombay on 6th September, 1976. They were cleared for home consumption on 16th and 30th September, 1976. They were cleared giving them the benefit of exemption from customs duty as provided by exemption Notification No. 256-Cus/76 issued under the provisions of Section 25 (1) of the Customs Act, 1962. On 10th and 11th January, 1977, the writ petitioners received notices to show cause why they should not be charged duty at the unexempted rate on the ground that the width of the said strips was in excess of that permitted by the said exemption Notification. 2-A. On 24th February, 1977, exemption Notification No. 27/77 was issued giving an exemption from customs duty to stainless steel strips of a width exceeding 127 mm and of a thickness of 3.176 mm and above.

(3.) On 25th March, 1977, the petitioners wrote to the Central Board of Excise and Customs with reference to a Notification that had specifically been issued in favour of M/s. Ahmedabad Advance Mills Ltd., Navsari, Bombay, who had imported identical stainless steep strips at about the same time as the petitioners. The petitioners submitted that they should be treated on a par with the said mills. The Notification that was issued in favour of the said mills was dated 19th March, 1977. It exempted in the public interest 735.787 MTs of stainless steel strips imported by the said mills from customs duty leviable thereon in the same manner as prevailed under the exemption Notification No. 256-Cus/76. The representation made by the petitioners on 25th March, 1977 was rejected on 20th May, 1978; no reason for the refusal was assigned. The petitioner also sought the benefit of the exemption Notification No. 27/77 dated 24th February, 1977 to be applied to them retrospectively. This was refused on 23rd June, 1978 on the ground that the exemption could not be issued so as to have retrospective effect. The petitioners had been pursuing the Statutory appeals provided under the Customs Act in respect of the demand made upon them for duty on 10th and 11th January, 1977 as aforestated. Having failed before the authorities, they preferred an appeal before the Central Excise and Gold Control Tribunal. The Tribunal also indicated that, in the circumstances, no relief could be granted to them.