KASHI CONDUCTORS Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioners seek to quash the impugned action of the respondents in endorsing the Bill of entry, Exh. D. , to the petition, to the effect that the petitioners are liable to pay the import duty on the goods imported by them despite the fact that the imports were made under the Special imprest Licence issued under the Duty Exemption Scheme. The petitioners, therefore, seek a direction restraining the respondents from demanding or recovering from the petitioners any duty of customs or additional duty in respect of the clearance of the goods imported against the said special Imprest Licence which is at Exh. C to the petition.

(2.) THE first petitioner is a firm of which the second petitioner is a partner. The first respondent is the Union of India. Respondent Nos. 2 and 3 represent the Customs Department whereas respondents Nos. 4 and 5 represent the Chief Controller of Imports and Exports and the 6th respondent is the Bombay Port Trust. The petitioners claim to be the registered manufacturers, who are exporters, engaged inter alia in the manufacture of ACSR conductors which are used in the distribution of electricity by the State Electricity Boards. For this purpose, the petitioners import Aluminium Wire Rods and High Carbon Steel Wire Rods which are used as raw material in the petitioners' factory for the manufacture of the said ACSR conductors. The petitioners supply the said A. C. S. R. conductors to various projects in India including those aided by the international Bank for Reconstruction and Development (for short, 'ibrd') and the International development Association (for short, IDA) which sponsor some State Aided Projects. There is no controversy before us that in the event of the petitioners supplying in A. C. S. R. conductors to the state Aided Projects sponsored by IBRD and IDA, such supplies are treated as "demand exports" within the meaning of the relevant para of the import policy for the relevant period to which we will make a reference later.

(3.) THERE is no dispute before us about the following facts that -