VIKRANT TYRES LTD Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner herein challenges an order passed by the Collector of Customs and Central Excise (Appeals) dated 10-1-1991 in Appeal No. C3/1031 to 1039/90. By the instant order, the Collector has disposed of all the nine appeals. The appeals were made for refund of (1) differential duties on landing charges; (2) refund of interest charges; and (3) refund of duty seeking the benefit of Customs Notification No. 60/87. The Appellate Authority rejected all the three heads. The present writ petition, however, is restricted only to the refund of differential duty on landing charges. The Appellate Authority rejected the refund of differential duty on landing charges on the basis of order passed by the Customs, Excise and Gold (Control) Appellate Tribunal (in short 'CEGAT' dated 16-9-1988 vide : Order No. 475/1988 feeling bound by the said order. The issue raised in this writ petition is about the correctness of the order of CEGAT which was binding on the Appellate Authority; the order passed by which is impugned in this writ petition.

(2.) The petitioner has not chosen to file an appeal against the Appellate Authority before CEGAT as according to the petitioner, it would have been futile to file an appeal, since the CEGAT had already taken the view against it in the above-mentioned order, and, therefore, has chosen to file this petition direct. According to the petitioner, the CEGAT has taken an incorrect view regarding the duty on the differential landing charges and has denied the refund on entirely untenable grounds and that view needs correction by this Court.

(3.) The duty is charged and assessed under Section 14 of the Customs Act, 1962 on the value of the imported goods. Rule 9(2) as it stood in 1988 was as under:-