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

1986 Supreme(Mad) 363

High Court of Judicature at Madras
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE NAINAR SUNDARAM
Venkateswara Stainless Steel and Wire Industries - Appellant
Versus
Union of India and Another - Respondent
Case No : Writ Petition Nos. 4062 to 4067 of 1980
Decided On : 29 August 1986

Advocates Appeared:Habibullah Badsha, Javid Khan, Advocates.

The term 'sheets' in Heading 73.15(2) of the Customs Tariff Act, 1975 is generic and includes circles.

Headnote:

CUSTOMS TARIFF ACT, 1975 - SECTION 73.13, 73.15 - IMPORT OF STAINLESS STEEL CIRCLES - CLASSIFICATION UNDER HEADING 73.15(1) OR 73.15(2) - INTERPRETATION OF THE TERM 'SHEETS' - APPLICATION OF NOTE 'N' TO HEADING 73.13 - ANALOGOUS LEGISLATIONS AND STANDARD DIMENSIONS - RELEVANCE.

Fact of the Case:

The petitioner imported stainless steel circles and wanted to bring them under Heading 73.15(1) of the Customs Tariff Act, 1975. However, the authorities classified them under Heading 73.15(2). The petitioner challenged this classification, arguing that stainless steel circles cannot fall within the category of 'sheets' under Heading 73.15(2) and should be classified under Heading 73.15(1).

Finding of the Court:

The court held that the expression 'sheets' occurring in Heading 73.15(2) is generic and includes circles. The court noted that there is no specific exclusion of circles from the term 'sheets' in Heading 73.15(2) and that note 'N' to Heading 73.13, which deals with sheets and plates of iron or steel, cannot be applied to Heading 73.15. The court also rejected the petitioner's arguments based on analogous legislations, standard dimensions, and the Import Control Policy.

Issues: 1. Whether stainless steel circles can be classified as 'sheets' under Heading 73.15(2) of the Customs Tariff Act, 1975. 2. Whether note 'N' to Heading 73.13, which deals with sheets and plates of iron or steel, can be applied to Heading 73.15.

Ratio Decidendi: 1. The term 'sheets' in Heading 73.15(2) is generic and includes circles. 2. Note 'N' to Heading 73.13 cannot be applied to Heading 73.15, as it specifically deals with sheets and plates of iron or steel.

Final Decision: The court dismissed the writ petitions, upholding the classification of stainless steel circles under Heading 73.15(2) of the Customs Tariff Act, 1975.

Judgment :-

The Petitioner in these six Writ petitions wanted to bring stainless steel circles imported by it under Heading 73.15 (1) of the First Schedule, hereinafter referred to as the Schedule, to the Customs Tariff Act, 1975 (No.51 of 1975). That has not been accepted by the Authorities concerned and they have brought the stainless steel circles under Heading 73.15 (2) of the Schedule. Heading 73.15 as a whole reads as follows:

2.According to the petitioner, stainless steel circles imported by it cannot fall within the category of 'sheets' under Heading 73.15 (2) as opined by the Authorities and they could only come under Heading 73.15 (1) of the Schedule. The expression 'sheets' occurring under Heading 73.15 (2) does not stand clarified by any Note. In contrast, note 'N' to Heading 73.13 which mentions about sheets and plates, of iron or steel, hot rolled or cold rolled, annexures a particular meaning to 'sheets' or 'plates'. Heading 73.13 reads as follows:

Note 'N' thereto runs in the following terms:

"Sheets and plates"

rolled products (Heading No. 73.13) other than coils for re-rolling as defined in paragraph (k) above of any thickness and, if in rectangles of a width exceeding 500 milli metres.

Heading No. 73.13 is to be taking to apply, inter alia, to sheets or plates which have been cut to non-rectangular shape, perforated, corrugated, channelled, ribbed, polished or coated, provided that they do not thereby assume the character of articles or of products falling within other Headings.'

3.The expression 'sheets' need not necessarily be given any restricted meaning so as to exclude circles. Heading 73.15 speaks about alloy steel and high carbon steel (which takes in stainless steel also) in the forms in the preceding Headings 73.06/07 to 73.14, which includes Heading 73.13 also. It is only in this context note 'N' may be looked into when it says that Heading 73.13 is to be taken to apply, inter alia, to sheets or plates, which have been cut to non-rectangular shape. May be it could be stated that note 'N' could have reference and relevance to Heading 73.13 alone; and not to Heading 73.15 and that exactly is the argument put forth by Mr. Habibullah Badsha, learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner. Even without reference to note 'N' to Heading 73.13, in the absence of any restriction laid down to the meaning to be annexed to the expression 'sheets' occurring in Heading 73.15(2) it is not possible to exclude stainless steel circles from the category of 'sheets' and bring it under the residuary Heading 73.15(1). A similar contention was raised before a Bench of the High Court of Delhi inSuper Traders and Anotherv.Union of India and Others- 1983 (12) ELT 258] and the Bench after adverting to note 'N' to Heading 73.13 expressed the view that a non-rectangular shape may be in the form of circle, may be of a shape having different angles, like being quadrangular or Hexagon, and no reasonable interpretation will exclude 'circles' from 'sheets' in general. But, as I have already stated, even without reference to and relying on note 'N' to Heading 73.13, in the absence of an express exclusion of 'circles' from 'sheets' occurring in Heading 73.15(2), it is not possible to take away 'circles' from 'sheets' as such occurring under that Heading. The expression 'sheet' is generic and it means an expanse or a spread out. Sheet could be in any form, in circle, square, rectangular, hexagonal, octagonal. Merely because the sheet takes the shape of a circle, it may not be permissible to take out of the category of sheet, and it continues to be a sheet only. The shape of the sheet is of no consequence at all, so long there is no specific exclusion of circles from the generic term 'sheets'.

4.Mr. Habibullah Badsha, learned Counsel for the petitioner, would also submit that the matter is not above ambiguity, and in such a case, the fiscal statute must be construed beneficial to and in favour of the citizen. I am not able to spell out any ambi



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