9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
1997 (7) TMI 143 - SC - CustomsApplicability of the Notifications No. 439/86 and No. 440/86, dated October 6, 1986 whereby partial exemption admissible in respect of basic customs duty and auxiliary customs duty on wood and articles of wood falling under Heading No. 40.08 of the Customs Tariff under Notifications No. 62-Cus., dated March 17, 1985 and No. 311/86-Cus., dated May 13, 1986 was withdrawn. Held that - In the present case the original Bill of Entry that was submitted by the appellant on October 9, 1986 was for warehousing. The said Bill of Entry was treated as for home consumption only on October 23, 1986 by the Assistant Collector. This does not mean that the Bill of Entry for the goods for home consumption has to be treated to have been presented on October 9, 1986. Since the Bill of Entry was noted as for home consumption on October 23, 1986 it has to be as presented for that purpose on October 23, 1986. The duty was, therefore, payable on the basis of the rates in force on October 23, 1986. The Tribunal has, therefore, rightly held Notifications dated October 6, 1986 were applicable and the appellant was not entitled to refund of duty. We, therefore, do not find any merit in this appeal. In the circumstances we do not consider it necessary to go into the correctness of the view of the Tribunal that the Notifications dated October 6, 1986 did not come into operation till October 13, 1986 when the copy of the Gazette in which the said Notifications were published was made available for sale to the public. Appeal dismissed.
Issues: Applicability of Notifications No. 439/86 and No. 440/86 dated October 6, 1986 on the partial exemption of customs duty on wood and articles of wood under Heading No. 40.08 of the Customs Tariff.
Analysis: The judgment in question deals with the applicability of Notifications No. 439/86 and No. 440/86 dated October 6, 1986, which withdrew the partial exemption on customs duty for wood and articles of wood under Heading No. 40.08 of the Customs Tariff. The appellant imported rough peeled wood from Malaysia and presented a Bill of Entry for warehousing the goods on October 9, 1986. Subsequently, on October 23, 1986, the appellant requested the Bill of Entry to be re-noted as a Home Consumption Bill. The issue arose when the appellant sought a refund of the duty paid, claiming that the Notifications dated October 6, 1986, were inoperative on October 9, 1986, the original submission date of the Bill of Entry. The Assistant Collector rejected the refund claim, which was upheld by the Collector of Customs and the Tribunal. The appellant contended that the Bill of Entry for Home Consumption should be considered as submitted on October 9, 1986, the original submission date for warehousing, as it was substituted on October 23, 1986. However, the court held that the relevant date for determining the rate of duty for goods entered for home consumption is the date the Bill of Entry is presented under Section 46 of the Customs Act, 1962. Since the Bill of Entry was noted for home consumption on October 23, 1986, the duty was payable based on the rates applicable on that date. Therefore, the Tribunal correctly found that the Notifications dated October 6, 1986 were applicable, and the appellant was not entitled to a refund of duty. The court rejected the appellant's argument that the substitution of the Bill of Entry should change the date of presentation, emphasizing that the duty rate is determined based on the date the Bill of Entry is presented for the specific purpose. Consequently, the appeal was dismissed, and no costs were awarded. The court did not delve into the Tribunal's view on the operational date of the Notifications, as it was deemed unnecessary in light of the main issue's resolution.
|
