Back
Supreme Court Of India
GULABDAS AND COMPANY
Versus
Assistant Collector of Customs
Decided On : April 25, 1957
CUSTOMS - CLASSIFICATION - LYRA BRAND CRAYONS - WHETHER CRAYONS OR COLOURED PENCILS - ASSESSMENT OF DUTY - INDIAN CUSTOMS TARIFF ACT, 1934 (32 OF 1934), ITEM 45 (A) AND ITEM 45 (4) - SEA CUSTOMS ACT, 1878 (8 OF 1878).
Fact of the Case:
The petitioners, established importers of stationary articles, obtained a license to import "artists materials", including "crayons". They ordered "lyra brand crayons" from Germany. The Assistant Collector of Customs provisionally classified the crayons under item 45 (a) of the Indian Customs Tariff, but later assessed duty under item 45 (4), which resulted in a higher duty. The petitioners challenged the assessment, arguing that lyra brand crayons were crayons and not coloured pencils, and that the orders were passed without a hearing, violating the principles of natural justice.
Finding of the Court:
The Court held that the petitioners' fundamental rights under Article 19 (1) (f) and (g) of the Constitution were not violated, as they did not challenge the provisions of the Indian Tariff Act, 1934 or the Sea Customs Act, 1878, and the orders were passed with jurisdiction. The Court also found that the petitioners had a full hearing before the Customs authorities and that the contention that the impugned orders were manifestly erroneous was not a matter for consideration under Article 32 of the Constitution.
Issues: 1. Whether the impugned orders violated the petitioners' fundamental rights under Article 19 (1) (f) and (g) of the Constitution? 2. Whether the orders were passed without a hearing, violating the principles of natural justice? 3. Whether the lyra brand crayons were crayons or coloured pencils for the purpose of assessment of duty?
Ratio Decidendi: 1. The petitioners did not challenge the provisions of the Indian Tariff Act, 1934 or the Sea Customs Act, 1878, and the orders were passed with jurisdiction. Therefore, there was no violation of fundamental rights. 2. The petitioners had a full hearing before the Customs authorities, and the contention that the orders were passed without a hearing was devoid of merit. 3. The question of whether the lyra brand crayons were crayons or coloured pencils was a matter for the Customs authorities to decide, and the Court could not embark on such an investigation under Article 32 of the Constitution.
Final Decision: The Court dismissed the petitions with costs, holding that there was no merit in any of the contentions raised by the petitioners.
Judgment
S. K. DAS, J.
( 1 ) THESE are twelve petitions under Art. 32 of the Constitution. Messrs. Kanji Shavji Parekh are the petitioners in three of the petitions, numbered 235, 236 and 240. The petitioners of the remaining cases are nine other firms. It is stated that all these firms, including Messrs. Kanji Shavji Parekh are established importers holding quota rights for importing stationary articles and have their places of business in Calcutta.
( 2 ) THESE petitions have been heard together, as they raise identical questions. They have been argued together, and Mr. N. C. Chatterji appearing for all the petitioners has taken us in detail through the facts of petition No. 235 of 1956. He has stated that the facts of the other petitions are exactly similar in nature, with only minor differences in dates, names and other unimportant details which have no bearing on the questions at issue. We shall accordingly state the facts of Petition No. 235 of 1956 in detail, and we are relived from the task of stating the facts of the other petitions.
( 3 ) THE relevant are these, Messrs. Kanji Shavji Parekh is a registered partnership firm, having its principal place of business in Calcutta. The partners of the firm are citizens of India. The firm is an established importer of stationary articles and has quota rights for importing stationary items including goods known as "artists Materials" and described in Appendix 10 of the Import Trade Control Policy Book for the licensing period July to December 1954. ON 4/08/1954, the Joint Chief Controller of Imports and Exports gave a license to the said firm, hearing after called the petitioners, to import goods known as "artists Material", falling under serial No. 168 (C) of part 4 of the Policy Statement for the period July to December, 1954. Item 168 of the said statement related to "articles made of paper and papier machie, stationery including drawing and copy books etc. " Sub-item (c) related to "other articles" under the same item. A fuller description of "artists Materials" as given in Appendix 20 referred to above. Item 11 of the said Appendix was crayons. The approximate value of the goods as mentioned in the licence was Rs. 2,088 and the validity of the licence was for a period of twelve months from the date of issue. But before the issue of the said licence, the petitioners had in the middle of June 1954 arranged with Messrs. Crystal Company, local agents and representatives of Messrs. Lyra Lead Pencil Company, Nuremberg, West Germany, for the purchase of lyra brand crayons. The petitioners stated that the said crayons were coloured crayons in twelve assorted colours - 12 crayons to a box and 12 boxes to a carton. On 14/06/1954, the petitioners wrote to the Assistant Collector of Customs for Appraisement, Calcutta, enclosing a carton of lyre brand crayons and enquiring as to the proper customs classification of the said crayons. ON 3/07/1954, a reply was given to the petitioners by the Assistant Collector of Customs for Appraisement, Calcutta, to the effect that lyra brand crayons were classifiable under item No. 45 (a) of the Indian Customs Tariff. It is worthy of note, however, that the letter contained a foot note which stated that the classification was provisional and was liable to revision in the light of examination of the goods at the time of importation. AFTER having obtained the licence on 4/08/1954, the petitioners placed an order through Messrs. Crystal Company for importing 486 dozen boxes of lyra brand coloured Crayons. The order was confirmed in September, 1954. The petitioners opened an irrevocable letter of credit in favour of the manufactures through a bank, and on or about 10/01/1955 the goods arrived from Hamburg in West Germany to the port of Calcutta in India. THE petitioners then field a Bill of Entry, through their clearing agents, under the provisions of the Sea Customs Act (Act 8 of 1878 ). On that Bill of Entry, an endorsement was made by the Assistant Coll
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
