ALUMINIUM INDUSTRIES LTD Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE learned judge from whose judgment in OP No. 5049 of 1981 this Appeal arises rejected the petitioner's prayer for a writ of certiorari to quash Exts. P1 and P3 demanding additional duty in the sum of Rs. 10,75,050. 66 under S. 3 of the Customs Tariff Act, 1975 and for a direction to refund a sum of Rs. 1,62,517. 11 alleged to have been excess paid by the petitioner as auxiliary duty under S. 47 of the Finance Act, 1981. Dismissing the Original Petition, the learned judge held that the petitioner was liable to pay duties of customs as per the rates in force on 28-3-1981 which was the date on which the bill of entry was filed.

(2.) THE admitted facts are: THE vessel carrying 250 MT aluminium ingots consigned to the petitioner reached Cochin Port on 25-3-1981. THE inward entry for the vessel was granted on 26-3-1981! THE bill of entry for the clearance of the goods was presented on 28-3-1981. With effect from 27-3-1981 auxiliary duty at 5 per cent became payable and additional duty was enhanced from 12. 5 per cent to 40 per cent plus 10 per cent sed.

(3.) COUNSEL for the appellant Sri. T. Chengalvarayan submits that the goods in question were imported into India as soon as the vessel carrying them entered the territorial waters of this country. Importation of the goods materialised at that point of time. The duties of customs, he says, were attracted as soon as the goods were so imported and the subsequent quantification of the duties ought to be made with reference to the rates in force at that time. Referring to the decision of the Bombay High Court in Shawhnay v. Sylvania and Laxman, 1975 Born. L. R. 380 and other cases, counsel submits that chargeability in respect of levy of customs duty arises from the import of goods. The provisions of the Act do not postpone changeability till the bill of entry is presented. The goods in the present case having been admittedly brought into Indian territorial waters prior to 27-3-1981, the enhanced rates, which became effective only as from that date, are not applicable in respect of these goods. He further submits that the notifications enhancing the rates by cancellation or reduction of the exemptions granted under the earlier notifications being not retrospective, the rates which applied at the point of time when the vessel entered the territorial waters remain unaffected and govern the levy in respect of these goods.