Culverts come within the meaning of the word 'bridges' and 'similar structures' appearing in Item 63 (9) of the Indian Customs Tariff.

P. B. MUKHARJI, J.

( 1 ) THIS is an application under Article 226 of the Constitution by Mercantile Express Co. Ltd. It is directed against the decision of the Assistant Collector for Appraisement, dated 30th June, 1955, assessing Armco Nestable Culverts complete with accessories under Item 63 (28) of the First Schedule of the Import Tariff under the Indian Tariff Act. The applicant appealed to the Collector of Customs who dismissed the appeal on 11-7-1955.

( 2 ) THE appellate order of the Customs states the reason for assessing under Item 63 (28) of the Indian Customs Tariff in the following terms :"it appears from the descriptive literature produced that Armco Nestable Culverts in question are made of fabricated corrugated steel sheets. These arc used as tunnelled drain for the passage of water under road bridges The main function of these culverts is to divert water in a particular channel. These therefore cannot be considered to fall within the purview of 'steel structures' for construction of bridges assessable under Item 63 (9) Indian Customs Tariff as contended by the appellants. The goods in question were therefore correctly assessed to duty under Item 63 (28) Indian Customs Tariff. I see no reason to interfere with the Assistant Collector's order in original. The appeal is accordingly rejected. "i have come to the conclusion that not one of the reasons put forward by the Collector of Customs in the appeal can be sustained as a matter of law and as a question of construction of Item 63 (9) and Item 63 (28) of the Indian Customs Tariff.

( 3 ) IT is admitted that the material in question is fabricated corrugated steel sheets. Item 63 (28) of the Indian Customs Tariff must be remembered to be a residuary provision. In naming the article in this item the language used is "all sorts of iron and steel and manufactures thereof not otherwise specified". Application of a residuary article must always be made with a good deal of caution for it can only be attracted where either expressly, or by necessary implication no provision can be found to apply to the articles in question. The other consideration to insist is that a citizen cannot be taxed except by the clearest language of Statute or by its most compelling implication, and cannot be taxed by doubt and vagueness.

( 4 ) THE applicant's contention is that the assessment should have been made under Item 63 (9 ). In naming the article under this item a difference is made between articles of British manufacture and not of British manufacture. The language is"iron or steel structures, fabricated partially or wholly, not otherwise specified, if made mainly or wholly of iron or steel bars, sections, plates, or sheets, for the construction of buildings, bridges, tanks, well curbs, trestles, towers and similar structures or for parts thereof, but not including builders' hardware or any of the articles specified in Item Nos. 72, 72 (3), 74 (1), 75 (3), 75 (4) or 76 (1 ). "

( 5 ) A good deal of the controversy in this case between the Customs and the applicant centres round the word 'bridge'. The controversy is whether a culvert is a bridge or a bridge a culvert. The Customs Authorities' conclusion is that steel structures to come under Item 63 (9) of the Indian Customs Tariff must be for the construction of bridges only and that culverts are not bridges. Therefore, they came to the conclusion that Item 63 (9) was not the proper provision under which assessment of these articles should be made.

( 6 ) THE reasoning of the Customs Authorities appears to me to be entirely wrong. Their error lies in confining the Steel Structures merely for the construction of bridges, and in not remembering the other material and significant words 'tanks, buildings, well curbs, trestles, towers and similar structures" in Item 63 (9) of the Customs Tariff. I am satisfied that even if culverts are not 'bridges', according to Engineering Experts, the word 'culvert' does in the context come under the ex

Click Here to Read the rest of this document