INDO PLAST Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner No. 1 is a partnership firm, while petitioner No. 2 is one of the partner. The petitioner No. 1 firm carries on business of importing and dealing in acrylic plastic scrap. The petitioners possess import licence issued on December 23, 1981 and in pursuance thereto, imported 36.503 metric tonnes of acrylic plastic scrap on January 7, 1982. The petitioners filed bill of entries on March 3, 1982 and the Collector of Customs assessed the bills by levying 100% basic duty, 30% auxiliary duty and 42% countervailing duty. The assessing authority classified the imported product under Item 15(A), the heading of which reads as :

(2.) The counsel for the petitioners urged that the petitioners are liable to pay 100% basic duty, plus 30% auxiliary duty and also the countervailing duty, but the levy of countervailing duty at the rate of 42% on the basis that the product imported is classifiable under Item 15(A) is not correct. The counsel urged that the product should have been classified under Item 68 which is a residuary item. Mr. Rege, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the Department, on the other hand, submitted that the classification of the product under Item 15(A) is correct. It is not possible to accept the submission of Mr. Rege because Item 15(A) was amended by addition of explanation on March 1, 1982 and by the explanation, even waste and scrap was included. The added explanation to Item 15(A) has no application to the facts of the present case as the import has been effected on January 7, 1982 i.e. long prior to March 1, 1982. It has been repeatedly held by this Court that the scrap imported before March 1, 1982 requires to be classified under Item 68. The petitioners are, therefore, entitled to succeed as far as the quantum of countervailing duty is concerned.

(3.) Accordingly, petition partly succeeds and the respondents are directed to ascertain the quantum of countervailing duty on the basis that the item imported falls under Item 68 of central Tariff Rules. On such assessment, the petitioners undertake to pay the duty found due and on payment of such duty, the Bank guarantee furnished by the petitioners in accordance with the interim order passed by this Court in favour of the Customs authority would stand discharged. In the circumstances of the case, there will be no order to costs.