SYNTHETICS AND CHEMICALS LTD Vs. S C COUTINHO

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Appeal raises a question relating to the real meaning of section 12 read with section 15 and a Notification issued under section 25 of the Customs Act, 1962.

(2.) In order to understand the controversy between the parties, a few facts may be noted. The appellants, who were the petitioners before the learned Singly Judge, had imported 550 Metric Tonnes of a material called "Disproportionated resin acid" (hereinafter called "the acid") from the United States of America as a part of their raw material in the manufacture of rubber products. The ship arrived in the Bombay Port on August 20, 1968. On the same day the Appellants presented a Bill of Entry Form Bond for the warehousing of these goods. After the formalities in that behalf were completed, they were actually warehoused. When these goods were imported the duty chargeable under the provisions of the Customs Act read with the provisions of the Indian Tariff Act, 1934, was 60 per cent for Item No. 87. The Appellants claim that they made representations as also the Trade itself made representations to the Government of India and that resulted in the Government of India issuing an exemption notification under Section 25(1) dated 12th October, 1968, on the acid in question, wherein the duty in excess of 27 1/2 per cent was exempted. In simple language, the 60 per cent duty was reduced to 27 1/2 per cent.

(3.) After such a notification was issued, the Appellants took delivery and removed from the warehouse the goods between the period from December, 1968 to June 1969 on the various dates. They paid duty at 27 1/2 per cent under the Notification and removed the goods after presenting each time the Bill of Entry for home consumption. After this was done, the Assistant Collector of Customs issued as many as four notices dated 15th January, 1969 (2 notices), dated 6th June 1969, and the fourth one dated 29th August 1969. The notices were replied to and by identical orders dated 27th January 1970, 27th February 1970 and the remaining two dated 28th February 1970, and rejected the representation and imposed a duty at 60 per cent on the basis of the original demand. Being aggrieved by these orders, the Appellants moved the learned Single Judge of this Court by way of writ petition without availing themselves of the Department Appeals. The learned Single Judge came to the conclusion by applying the principle of a Division Bench Judgment of this Court that the exemption Notification was of no assistance to the petitioners-appellants and that they were liable to pay the full duty as levied by the Assistant Collector of Customs. Since the said petition was dismissed, the Appellants have moved this Court by way of Appeal.