9911796707
|
Home
Issues Involved:
1. Validity of the Order dated 19th June, 1974 u/s 142 of the Customs Act, 1962. 2. Legality of the demand for short levy of Export Duty. 3. Adherence to principles of natural justice in the assessment and levy of duty. 4. Determination of iron content for duty calculation. 5. Applicability of Section 142(a) and (b) of the Customs Act, 1962. Summary: 1. Validity of the Order dated 19th June, 1974 u/s 142 of the Customs Act, 1962: The petitioner challenged the order dated 19th June, 1974, issued by the Assistant Collector of Customs, which demanded Rs. 86,868/- for short levy of Export Duty from 1970. The court found that the order was issued without giving the petitioner an opportunity to show cause or a hearing, violating principles of natural justice. Consequently, the order was deemed null and void. 2. Legality of the demand for short levy of Export Duty: The petitioner argued that the demand was based on an incorrect assessment of iron content using a report from M/s. Italab, which was not intended for duty assessment. The court held that the Customs Authorities should have relied on the Government Laboratory report and that the assessment based on the Italab report was incorrect and illegal. 3. Adherence to principles of natural justice in the assessment and levy of duty: The court emphasized that the assessment and levy of duty are quasi-judicial functions requiring adherence to natural justice principles. The petitioner was not given a notice to show cause or a hearing, violating the audi alteram partem rule. The court concluded that the order dated 19th August, 1972, was made in violation of natural justice principles and was thus null and void. 4. Determination of iron content for duty calculation: The court agreed with the petitioner that the duty should be calculated based on the iron content in the moist condition of the ore at the time of export, not on a dried sample. The Customs Authorities' failure to consider the moisture content led to an erroneous assessment. The court cited a recognized international practice of determining iron content in moist ore and held that the assessment should reflect this practice. 5. Applicability of Section 142(a) and (b) of the Customs Act, 1962: The court found that Section 142(1) did not apply as no money was owing from the Government in connection with the exports made on the m.v. Jessica. The retention of the Bank Draft of Rs. 30,000/- did not fall within the provisions of Section 142. Conclusion: The petition succeeded, and the rule was made absolute in terms of prayers (b) and (c) of Paragraph 14 of the petition. The court declared the impugned order dated 19th June, 1974, null and void and held that the assessment and levy of duty were not in accordance with the law. There was no order as to costs.
|
