SIPTA COATED STEELS LIMITED Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) ALL these writ petitions have been heard together because all of them challenge the same Public Notice issued by the Collector of Customs, Bombay dated 11th June 1990 and another Public Notice issued by the Collector of Customs, Bombay dated 15th January 1992.

(2.) THE petitioners in all these petitions have imported goods which arrived at the Bombay Port. The petitioners had filed Bills of Entry for warehousing. For warehousing goods outside Bombay, the petitioners have been required to furnish bank guarantees for the amount of duty payable in respect of these goods in the manner set out in these Public Notices (or such of them as were applicable at the relevant time) to cover the period of transit i. e. the period during which the goods were being transferred from the Bombay Port or a warehouse in Bombay to a warehouse outside Bombay. The petitioners have challenged these Public Notices.

(3.) THE petitions fall into two broad categories or groups. Category 1 those cases where goods were imported and were sent for being warehoused outside Bombay directly from the Bombay Port. Category 2 those cases in which goods which were warehoused in a warehouse at Bombay were thereafter transferred to a warehouse outside Bombay. In each of these categories there are two subgroups. Subgroup (A) consists of those petitions which have been filed prior to the coming into operation of the Public Notice of 15th January 1992. These petitions, therefore, challenge only the Public Notice of 11th June 1990. Therefore the petitions which are listed in Categories 1 (A) and 2 (A) are petitions which challenge only the Public Notice of 11th June 1990. Subgroup (B) consists of those petitions in which either both the Public Notices of 11th June 1990 and 15th January 1992 are challenged or where only the Public Notice of 15th January 1992 is challenged. Petitions in Categories 1 (B) and 2 (B) are such petitions.