Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
S.M.SUBRAMANIAM, MOHAMMED SHAFFIQ
G.G.Steels – Appellant
Versus
Union Of India, Represented By Its Secretary, Ministry Of Finance – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. facts and parties involved in the writ petitions. (Para 1) |
| 2. court analysis on the validity of the notifications. (Para 4 , 4 , 8) |
| 3. arguments against the legality of notifications issued under the ftdr act. (Para 6 , 6 , 7) |
| 4. judicial interpretation of legislative intent regarding compliance with the ftdr act. (Para 11 , 12) |
| 5. final orders and conclusion regarding notification validity. (Para 15 , 16) |
ORDER :
This batch of Writ Petitions are filed challenging the following notifications, notices and orders issued pursuant thereto.
| S. No | WP No. | Prayer | Challenged Notification | Product Description |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | WP No. 6840 of 2022 | Writ of Certiorari to quash Notification imposing Minimum Import Price (MIP) under FTDR Act as arbitrary and contrary to Section 14(2) of Customs Act | Notification No. 38/2015-2020 dated 05.02.2016 read with Trade Notice No.17/2016 dated 10.02.2016 | 173 HS Codes under Chapter 72 – Iron & Steel Products |
| 2 | WP No. 25353 of 2023 | Writ of Certiorari to quash notification as arbitrary and contrary to Section 14(2) of Customs Act | Notification No. 57/2015-2020 dated 14.02.2023 | Areca Nut/Betel Nut |
| 3 | WP No. 25356 of 2023 | Writ of Certiorari to quash notification as arbitrary and contr | ||
The court affirmed that MIPs can be validly issued under the FTDR Act, with the requirement of laying the notifications before Parliament being directory, not mandatory.
A perusal of the impugned notification reveals that by virtue of such notification the Central Government, in exercise of powers conferred by section 3 of the Act read with paragraphs 1.02 and 2.01 o....
(1) Delegated Legislation acquires force of law only upon its publication in Official Gazette.(2) Delegated Legislation – Once legislature has prescribed specified mode of promulgation, executive can....
The main legal point established in the judgment is that a Trade Notice cannot be issued to amend a Notification under the FTDR Act, and any amendment must be made in accordance with the statutory pr....
The main legal point established is that a Trade Notice cannot amend a notification issued under Section 3 of the FTDR Act without following the statutory procedure.
The court declared Section 25(4) of the Customs Act unconstitutional, asserting that notification increases in duty require proper publication to inform the public adequately.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the exercise of discretion by the Customs Commissioner and the Appellate Tribunal must conform to the provisions of the Customs Act, 1962, and....
The effective date of a notification under Section 25(4) of the Customs Act is the date of its publication in the Official Gazette in e-mode.
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
