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

1994 Supreme(SC) 1231

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
BEFORE R.M. SAHAI AND S.B. MAJMUDAR, JJ.
BOMBAY OIL INDUSTRIES PVT. LTD.
Versus
UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS
Civil Appeals Nos. 4013-13A of 1985 with C.A. Nos. 978 and
979, 1281-82 of 1985
Decided on 6-12-1994
ISI booklets Indian Standard, Methods of Sampling and Test for Oils and Fats and Indian Standard, Specification for Animal Tallow, referred to
Advocates appeared:
M. Chandrasekharan, Additional Solicitor General (M.A. Rangaswamy, Ms Radha Rangaswamy, Ms Samitha, P.H. Parekh, N.K. Bajpai, V.K. Verma and C.V.S. Rao, Advocates, with him) for the appearing parties.

Advocates:
M.A.RANGASWAMY, M.CHANDRASEKHRAN, N.K.Bajpai, P.H.Parekh, Radha Rangaswamy, SAMITHA, V.K.VARMA

Headnote:

Customs Act, 1962 - Subsection (1) of Section 25 - Section 131(3) - Section 12 - Section 25 - Section 25(1) - Customs Tariff Act, 1975 - Customs Duty - Bleachable Fancy Tallow - All these appellants had imported tallow being bleachable fancy tallow from foreign countries by different consignments - So far as common appellant M/s Bombay Oil Industries Pvt. Ltd. is concerned, it imported bleachable mutton tallow while rest of appellants imported bleachable fancy tallow which according to them was not mutton tallow - These imports were subject to customs duty - As per applicable customs tariff as laid down in First Schedule , imported tallow was liable to customs duty at rate of 35 per cent ad valorem - A partial exemption was given by Central Government from payment of customs duty so far as imported tallow was concerned by an exemption - Notification issued in exercise of powers conferred on Central Government - Held, They submitted that laying down of Condition 2 in notification was a clear error on part of Central Government which was corrected by them by latter notification and, therefore, latter notification be treated as clarificatory notification read with above notification - It is not possible to agree as disputed imports with which we are concerned - They are, therefore, covered by earlier Notification - It is true that Tribunal by noting these submissions has observed in paragraph 35 of judgment that colour specification was an error and that error be removed but for that reason it could not ignore colour specification when it was part of law – Court entirely agree with view of Tribunal that even if Central Government corrected its error about Condition 2 by issuing a fresh notification, earlier colour specification requirement remained operative for imports made by concerned importers prior when earlier notification was holding field - Latter notification cannot be said to be merely clarificatory notification nor can it have any retrospective effect - It is a fresh notification laying down fresh condition deleting earlier Condition 2 about colour specification - Hence this submission is of no avail to learned counsel for appellants – Appeal Dismissed.

JUDGMENT

MAJMUDAR, J. -

These appeals arise out of a common judgment rendered by the Customs, Excise & Gold (Control) Appellate Tribunal, New Delhi, by which it disposed of ten appeals in all. Civil Appeals Nos. 4013-13A of 1985 challenge that part of the order of the Tribunal by which the appeals of the common appellant, namely, M/s Bombay Oil Industries Pvt. Ltd. were dismissed by the Tribunal; while the remaining four appellants seek to challenge the other part of the Tribunals order by which four appeals moved by the Collector of Customs, Bombay, against the present appellants concerned came to be allowed by the Tribunal.

2. The facts leading to these appeals may be noted at the outset to appreciate the grievance of the appellants. All these appellants had imported tallow being bleachable fancy tallow from foreign countries between 2-8-1976 and 2-9-1978 by different consignments. So far as common appellant M/s Bombay Oil Industries Pvt. Ltd. in CA Nos. 4013-13A of 1985 is concerned, it imported bleachable mutton tallow while the rest of the appellants imported bleachable fancy tallow which according to them was not mutton tallow. These imports were subject to customs duty under the provisions of the Customs Act, 1962. As per the applicable customs tariff as laid down in the First Schedule to the Customs Tariff Act, 1975, the imported tallow was liable to customs duty under sub-heading of Heading No. 15.01/06 at the rate of 35 per cent ad valorem. A partial exemption was given by the Central Government from the payment of customs duty so far as imported tallow was concerned by an exemption notification dated 2-8-1976 being Notification No. 141-Cus/76 issued in exercise of powers conferred on the Central Government by subsection (1) of Section 25 of the Customs Act, 1962. The said notification provided that the Central Government being satisfied that it is necessary in the public interest so to do, exempts tallow having the specifications mentioned hereunder and falling under sub-heading 2 of Heading No. 15.01/06 of the First Schedule to the Customs Tariff Act, 1975 (51 of 1975), when imported into India, from payment of so much of that portion of duty of customs leviable thereon which is specified in the said First Schedule as is in excess of 15 per cent ad valorem. The notification further laid down the specifications of the exempted tallow. It was provided that the imported tallow meeting the indicated specifications was entitled to partial exemption of customs duty to the extent of 30 per cent ad valorem. These specifications read as under:

"SPECIFICATION

(i)

Moisture and insoluble impurities per cent by weight, max.

1.0

(ii)

Colour in a 1 inch cell on the Lovibond scale expressed as Y+5R not deeper than

20

(iii)

Saponification value

192 to 202

(iv)

Iodine value (wijs)

32 to 50

(v)

Acid value, max.

10

(vi)

Unsaponifiable matter, per cent by weight, max.

0.5

(vii)

Titre of fatty acids °C

40 to 49"

The said notification was amended later on by a notification dated 2-9-1978 whereby specification No. 2 was deleted from the earlier notification dated 2-8-1976 being Notification No. 141-Cus-76. The said latter notification dated 2-9-1978 being Notification No. 168/F No. 370/24/78 Cus I provided that in exercise of the powers conferred by sub-section (1) of Section 25 of the Customs Act, 1962 (52 of 1962), the Central Government being satisfied that it is necessary in the public interest so to do hereby makes the following amendment in the notification of the Government of India in the Department of Revenue and Banking No. 141-Customs dated 2-8-1976, namely: "In the specifications mentioned under the said notification, Item 2 and the entries relating thereto shall be omitted."

3. It, therefore, became clear that the importers of tallow after coming into operation of the latter notification dated 2-9-1978 had not to satisfy the customs authorities that their imported tallow met the requirement of erstwhile Item 2 in the earlier notification of 2-8-1976.











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 Back to top