Back
2019 Supreme(AP) 282
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI
C. PRAVEEN KUMAR, M. SATYANARAYANA MURTHY, JJ.
Ruchi Soya Industries Ltd. – Appellants
Versus
Union of India and Ors. – Respondents
WP Nos. 4533 and 4534 of 2019
Decided On : 28-09-2019
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant : Shanthasree Elipe
For the Respondents: B. Krishna Mohan, Assistant Solicitor General
Headnote:
Constitution of India,1950 - Article 22(1),(2), 371-D , 311 , 229,235 , 14,16(1) , 226 - Customs Act - sub-sections (1), (2-A) and (4) of Section 25, 15(1)(b) read with 68 25(4) and 14(2), 25(4) , 46 and 25(1) - Income Tax Act - Section 8 - Engaged in business of solvent extraction - Pertaining to re-assessment - Refund petitioner - WP No. 4534 of 2019 is filed to issue writ of mandamus calling for records pertaining to re-assessment of subject Ex-Bond Bills of Entry viz., Bills of Entry and both dated and Bills of Entry all by respondents asking petitioner to pay higher rate of duty for clearance of subject goods and quash same holding that higher rate of duty is not applicable and consequently direct respondents to refund petitioner, an amount of with interest paid by petitioner from date of deposit till date of payment - Petitioner in both petitions is Industries Limited, and it is a public limited company, duly incorporated under Indian Companies Act – Held, Learned Counsel for respondents, when a remedy by way of appeal under Sections 128 and 129(A) of Customs Act is available, petitioner is disentitled to claim relief under Article 226 of Constitution of India - But, said contention cannot be accepted for simple reason that appellate authority or Tribunal cannot declare any provision in statute as illegal or arbitrary - Therefore, we find no force in argument of learned Counsel for respondents and same is rejected - Respondents are liable to repay amount collected from petitioners for clearance of imported goods for home consumption beyond original rate prevailing on date of prior to date of publication of notification with interest paid by petitioner from date of deposit till date of payment - Writ petitions are allowed
JUDGMENT :
M. Satyanarayana Murthy, J.
1. WP No. 4533 of 2019 is filed for issue of writ of mandamus to declare Section 25(4) of the Customs Act, 1962 as amended by the Finance Act, 2016 as arbitrary, illegal, ultra vires and unconstitutional and strike down the same accordingly; and consequently declare the Notification No. 29/2018-Cus dated 1.3.2018 being illegal, arbitrary, ultra vires and infringing the fundamental rights of the petitioner to trade and otherwise bad in law.
2. WP No. 4534 of 2019 is filed to issue writ of mandamus calling for the records pertaining to re-assessment of the subject Ex-Bond Bills of Entry viz., Bills of Entry Nos. 5401915 and 5402027, both dated 1.3.2018 and Bills of Entry Nos. 5419273, 5419349, 5419387 and 5419452, all dated 2.3.2018 by the respondents asking the petitioner to pay higher rate of duty for clearance of the subject goods and quash the same holding that higher rate of duty is not applicable and consequently direct the respondents to refund the petitioner, an amount of Rs. 2,88,16,200/- with interest paid by the petitioner from the date of deposit till the date of payment.
3. The petitioner in both the petitions is M/s. Ruchi Soya Industries Limited, and it is a public limited company, duly incorporated under the Indian Companies Act. The petitioner company is engaged in the business of solvent extraction, refining of edible oils, manufacture of soya food products, import, export and trading of agri-commodities. The petitioner company has been importing crude vegetable oils in bulk from different parts of the world for the last more than two decades, maintaining various manufacturing units for refining edible oils like refined soya bean oil, refined palmolein, vanaspati and other oils.
4. The petitioner entered into a contract dated 18.1.2018 with its foreign supplier "Just Oil and Gran Pte, Ltd." Singapore for purchase of 9,500 Metric Tonnes (+/-2%) of Crude Palm Oil of Edible Grade in bulk which will hereinafter be referred, as "the subject goods". Pursuant to and in terms of the aforesaid contract, the aforesaid foreign supplier of the petitioner, shipped 4,000 Metric Tonnes of the subject goods vide four Bills of Lading No. C18/DMI/KK-01 to No. C18/DMI/KK-04 all dated 6.2.2018 as per vessel 'MT CAMDEN VOY.18' from the port of Dubai, Indonesia with port of discharge being Kakinada, Andhra Pradesh.
5. The petitioner further contended that the petitioner filed Six Ex-Bond Bills of Entry under Section 68 of the Customs Act, 1962, for clearance of the subject goods for home consumption viz., Bills of Entry Nos. 5401915 and 5402027, both dated 1.3.2018 and Bills of Entry Nos. 5419273, 5419349, 5419387 and 5419452, all dated 2.3.2018, the subject goods shipped had initially filed Warehousing Bill of Entry No. 5295797 dated 21.2.2018. The subject goods merit classification under Customs Tariff Heading 15111000 of the Customs Tariff Act and the subject goods are covered by Entry 57-II(A) of the Notification No. 50/2017-Cus, dated 30.6.2017 and the petitioner was required to pay, 30% basic customs duty. Further, vide Notification No. 50/2017-Cus, dated 30.6.2017, rate of duty from 7.5% (basic customs duty) was increased from time to time and by the date of import, the rate of duty was 30%, vide Notification No. 87/2017-Cus, dated 17.11.2017.
6. It is further contended that, the petitioner filed the aforesaid two Ex-Bond Bills of Entry both dated 1.3.2018 claiming classification and rate of duty under Section 68 of the Customs Act, 1962 seeking clearance of 2,000 Metric Tonnes of subject goods for home consumption. The subject goods with regard to Ex-Bond Bills of Entry dated 1.3.2018 were assessed on 1.3.2018, levied @ 30% basic customs duty, where the duty structure with regard to the subject goods was 30% (basic customs duty) plus 10% (social welfare surcharge).
7. The two Ex-Bond Bills
