Back
2002 Supreme(Del) 1017
High Court Of Delhi
CANNON INDUSTRIES PRIVATE LIMITED - Appellant
Versus
UNION OF INDIA - Respondent
Decided On : 07/31/2002
The court emphasized the importance of strict compliance with procedures for customs duty and held that the petitioner's failure to fulfill the requisite conditions precluded them from claiming the benefit of the old customs duty rates.
Headnote:
Export - Customs Duty - DEPB - [FACT OF THE CASE] The petitioner, an exporter of acrylic shawls, filed shipping bills for export claiming DEPB drawback duty. The consignment arrived at Customs Bonded Depot, but due to delay in computer entry, the DEPB rates were lowered, causing a loss to the petitioner. The Customs authorities delayed release of the consignment, leading to loss. [FINDING OF THE COURT] The court found that the consignment arrived late and was not accompanied by the required package details, leading to denial of the old customs duty rates. The court held that the petitioner's failure to comply with procedures precluded them from claiming the benefit of the old customs duty rates. [ISSUES] The issues involved the delay in computer entry, denial of old customs duty rates, and the petitioner's compliance with procedures. [RATIO DECIDENDI] The court held that the petitioner's failure to fulfill the requisite conditions precluded them from claiming the benefit of the old customs duty rates. The court also emphasized the importance of strict compliance with procedures for customs duty. [FINAL DECISION] The writ petition was dismissed, and no costs were awarded.
( 1 ) THE petitioner herein is an exporter of acrylic shawls. On 1. 4. 1997 the Ministry of Commerce and Industry, Department of Commerce, Government of India, issued a handbook of procedure ofexim Policy from 1st April 97 to 31st march 2002. Policy was framed for the benefit of the exporters. The relevant contents of policy to give benefit to the exports are as under:
"however, wherever the Policy provisions have been modified to the disadvantage of the exporters, the same shall not be applicable to the consignments already handed over to the Customs for examination and subsequent exports upto the date of the Public Notice. Similarly, in such cases where the goods are handed over to the customs authorities before the expiry of the export obligation period but actual exports take place after Expiry of the Export obligation period, such Exports shall be considered within the export obligation period and taken towards fulfillment of export obligation. "
( 2 ) A further Policy Circular being No. 19 for 1998-2002 was issued on 10th July 1998 which is in the following terms:
"this issue has been examined and it has been decided that wherever the DEPB rates have been reduced or value capping has been imposed the reduction of rate or imposition of value cap shall not be applicable wherever the consignment of exports under DEPB have already been handed over to the Customs Authorities prior to the date of notification for examination and clearance for exports. This issues with the approval of commerce Minister. "
( 3 ) THE petitioner herein filed eight shipping bills through its Clearing house Agent bearing S. No. 1091548 to 1091555 dated 28th March 2000 for export of acrylic shawls under the said scheme claiming the DEPB drawback duty, drawback scheme, DEPB Serial No. 40 of product group 89. The goods arrived at Customs Bonded/notified i. e. Inland Container Depot at Tughlakabad, new Delhi run by the Container Corporation of India on 29th March 2000 and 31st march 2000. The petitioner was given to understand that as there had been eight shipping bills for one container, entries in the computer thereof could be made only upon obtaining permission therefor from the Dy. Commissioner, Export. Such permission was granted on 1st April 2000 whereafter such entry had been made. According to the petitioner, they, however, in the evening of 31st March 2000 itself explained the matter to the higher authorities and requested for immediate action by a letter dated 31st March 2000 which is to the following effect:
"sub: Export of Acrylic Shawls under 8 invoices. With reference to your query, we clarify that this is the requirement of our buyer to ship the goods together in one lot by making separate 8 invoices, as the buyer has to sell these goods to the ultimate buyers in smaller lots. As the new EXIM policy will be announced tomorrow, the DEPB rates may vary / change, so you are requested to kindly allow the shipment to enable us to hand over the goods to the shipping line. Your timely action will be highly appreciated. Thanking you, yours Faithfully, for Cannon Steels Pvt. Ltd. (R. K. Goyal) director"
( 4 ) ACCORDING to the petitioner, as the computer system was down, the entries could not be made in the computer in relation whereto the petitioner had issued another letter on the said date which reads thus:
"sub: Export of Acrylic Shawls under 8 invoices. With reference to our telephonic talk this evening, we are requesting your honour that Dy. Commissioner (Exports) be communicated to allow us the exports today, as your honour has told that computer system is down. Non release of consignment today may effect our export performance, as the new EXIM policy will be announced tomorrow, the DEPB rates may vary / change, so the exports are to be completed on 31 March. Kindly do the needful at the earliest and oblige. Thanking you, yours faithfully, for Cannon Steels Pvt. Ltd. (R. K. Goyal) director"
( 5 ) ACCORDING to the petitioner, such permissi
