SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

1998 Supreme(SC) 356

K. T. THOMAS, M. M. PUNCHHI, S. SAGHIR AHMAD
Union Of India – Appellant
Versus
V. M. Salgaoncar And Brothers Private LTD. – Respondent


Judgment

Thomas, J.-Whether vessels which are used as transhippers can also be treated as “ocean going vessels” is the short but hotly mooted issue involved in these appeals. It was once decided by a Bench of two Judges of this Court in Chowgula & Co. Pvt. Ltd. v. Union of India & Ors.1 that such vessels cannot be termed as “ocean-going vessels”. Another Bench has now expressed the opinion that the ratio in the above decision requires reconsideration by a larger Bench. Thus, these matters have come up before us.

2. Some facts necessary for these appeals can be stated thus:

3. Section 46 of the Customs Act, 1962 requires the importer of any goods, other than goods intended for transit or transhipment, to present a Bill of Entry for home consumption of such goods in the prescribed form. By a notification issued by the Ministry of Finance (Department of Revenue) Government of India on 11.10.1958, “ocean-going vessels” have been exempted from payment of customs duty. The said notification reads thus :

“Under Govt. of India Ministry of Fin­ance (Dept. of Revenue) Notifica­tion No. 262-Customs dated the 11th October, 1958, ocean-going vessels other than vessels imported to be broken up, are




































Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top