9911796707
|
Home
Issues:
Validity of exemption notification under Section 25 of the Customs Act for import of caustic soda. Analysis: The judgment concerns the validity of an exemption notification issued by the Central Government for the import of caustic soda. The petitioners, a Private Limited Company engaged in importing and exporting commodities, challenged the exemption granted to a specific corporation as violative of Section 25 of the Customs Act. The exemption was issued due to a shortage of caustic soda in the country, necessitating the import of 10,000 tonnes through the State Chemicals and Pharmaceuticals Corporation. The petitioners argued that the exemption did not meet the conditions of public interest and exceptional circumstances under Section 25(2). Despite the absence of a response from the Government, the Court found the circumstances justifying the exemption as being in the public interest due to the shortage of caustic soda domestically. The Court noted that the exemption was not available to all importers, but it declined to grant a vague relief extending the exemption to all importers due to potential chaos. The petitioners also contended that the exemption notification should be struck down for non-compliance with Section 25(2) of the Act. However, the Court refused to grant this relief considering the notification was issued in 1979, and more than five years had passed since the import took place. Striking down the notification at this stage would not benefit the petitioners. Despite the potential invalidity of the notification, the Court deemed it unnecessary to provide relief. Consequently, the petition was dismissed, and the costs were directed to be borne by the Union of India due to its failure to file a response despite adjournments. In conclusion, the Court upheld the validity of the exemption notification for the import of caustic soda, finding it justified in the public interest due to the shortage of the product domestically. The Court declined to extend the exemption to all importers and refused to strike down the notification, considering the delay and lack of benefit to the petitioners. The Union of India was ordered to bear the costs of the petition for its failure to respond during the proceedings.
|
