Wheat Import – Writ Petitions challenging duty - Customs - 018/2000

Circular No.18/2000-Cus. F.NO. 494/2/2000-Cus. VI Government of India Ministry of Finance Department of Revenue Central Board of Excise Customs New Delhi, the 13 th March, 2000 Subject: Wheat Import – Writ Petitions challenging duty It is directed to inform that a number of writ peritions have been filed in the High court of Chennai and in the Hight court of Kerala (Ernakulam Bench) challenging the power of the Central Government vide Section 8A of CTA’65 to impose duty on imported wheat vide Notification NO. 127/99 Customs dated 1.12.1999. the customs duty on imported wheat was raised from ‘Free’ to 50%. 2. In this connection this is to convey that in the counter-affidavits that may be filed by the Commissioneers including on behalf on Union of India the following may be mentioned:- the Notification 127/99 customs dated 1.12.1999 was issued under Section 8A of CTA that gives emergency power to the Central Government to enhance the due rate. Further in terms of Seciton7(3) the Notification 127/99 was duly approved by the Parliament. (The Lok Sabha passed the resolution at the sitting held on 21 st December, 1999). The comments of JS9TRU) to Commissioner of Customs, Cochin may also be used while preparing a suitable counter-affidavit (Annexure "A"). The total number of similar cases pending in various courts, indication revenue involving may also be intimated to the Board. Annexure "A" To : Shri T.K. Jayaraman Commissioner of Customs, Cochin From : T.R. Rustagi joint Secretary (TRU0 FINREV0 New Delhi. F.No. 354/56/99—TRU(.) Kindly refer to your letter F.No. S32/180/99 AP(1) dated 28.12.99 regarding writ Petition No. 32741/99 filed the Hon’ble High court of Kerala challenging the authority of central Government to impose duty. On wheat through a notification issued under Section 8A of the Customs Traiff Act, 1975(.). The main issue raised by the petitioner is that since that rate of duty prescribed in respect of wheat in the tariff was "Free" prior to 1.12.99, it was not "leviable " to duty (.). according to him the Central Government could have invoked the power to increase duty under Section 8A only if wheat was leviable to duty in the first place (.). in this regard, he seeks to make a distinction between "Free" rate and "Nil" rate and argues that while nil rate constitutes a levy free [rate] does not(.) There does not appear to be any basis for making this distinction(.) According to Section 12 to the Custom Act, 1962 "Duties of customs shall be levied at such rates as may be specified under the Customs Tariff Act, 1975(.)" In respect of goods falling under subheading Nos. 1001.10 and 1001.90 of the first schedule to the Customs Tariff Act the rate of duty prescribed prior to 1.12.99 was "Free"(.) . When read in the light of Section 12, it is evident that goods falling under these subheading were leviable to duty at "Free" rate (.) Further, Notification No. 127/99 dated 1.12.99 whereby duty on wheat was increased to 50% has already received the approval of Parliament (.) Admission of the writ may be opposed accordingly (.) In view of the significance of the issue raised in the writ your may request Additional Solicitor General, Chennai to appear on behalf of the Central Government.