CAMAC LEATHER P LTD Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The Court: These two applications are taken up together. The matter is about a claim for customs duty benefit claimed by the writ petitioners because of a certain Notification bearing No. 224/85/CUS. The relevant part of the said notification is set out below: -

(2.) There are 24 items for exemption given under the aforesaid table head "Description of goods", but it is not necessary to set out the same as the benefit is claimed only for stamping foils.

(3.) The case of the writ petitioner is that stamping foils were imported from Germany by various manufacturers engaged in the leather industry and that show-cause notices were issued to all for the purpose of claiming full duty and for the purpose of removing those imported consignments from the beneficial purview of the aforesaid notification. As the show-cause notices were served to various importers, the usual procedure of cyclostyling a form was adopted on the part of the respondents and the differences in detail as to the different importers were filled in as applicable. I do not find anything wrong with the employment of cyclostyled notice as it has not been shown before me that any filling of the blanks with regard to the writ petitioner was either wrong in law or made pursuant to any non-application of mind.