9911796707
TMI Blog1986 (5) TMI 35X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... trade, as 'Durafil' Brand of High Tenacity Viscose Staple Fibre. 3. Viscose Staple Fibre is liable to Customs duty and the standard rate of duty specified for such Fibre in the Customs Tariff Act, 1975 is 140 per cent. 4. On November 1, 1980 the Central Government published two Notifications being Notification Nos. 215-CUS and 216-CUS both dated November 1, 1980 the text whereof are set out below : Notification No. 215-CUS dated 1-11-1980. "In exercise of the powers conferred by sub-section (1) of section 25 of the Customs Act 1962 (52 of 1962), the Central Government, being satisfied that it is necessary in the public interest to do so, hereby exempts viscose staple fibre and viscose tow, falling within Chapter 56 of the First Sch ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 0% ad valorem in the place of 10% - ad valorem". 6. On or about September 14, 1982 the petitioners entered into two several contracts with a Firm of Bombay whereby and whereunder the petitioners agreed to buy a total quantity of 50 tons of 'Durafil' Brand High Tenacity Viscose Staple Fibre manufactured by a firm of the United Kingdom. 7. The said firm caused the concerned goods to be shipped from the port Middlesborough in England to the port of Calcutta on December 6, 1982. 8. By two separate notifications both dated December 14, 1982 the Central Government amended the Notification nos. 215-CUS and 216-CUS dated November 1, 1980 as already referred to earlier. 9. The results of the said amendments were that the effective rate of du ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nts were compelling the petitioners to pay Customs duty at the rate of 30 percent on the wrongful basis that Notification No. 215 is applicable and were also compelling them to pay auxiliary duty and additional or countervailing duty before allowing clearance of the consignments. 14. The petitioners accordingly invoked the writ jurisdiction of this court for a writ in the nature of Mandamus commanding the respondents to desist from levying any duty of Customs including auxiliary and/or additional and/or countervailing duty in respect of the subject goods and also to allow clearance of the said goods without payment of any duty of Customs whether basic and/or auxiliary and/or additional, as well as for further relief's. 15. The responden ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d containers for packing the cartons/outers of cigarettes and did not recover from the wholesale dealers the amount of excise duty attributable to the cost of such corrugated fibre board containers during the period 24th May, 1976 to 2nd November 1982. Subsequently, the Central Government having decided that the value, of such containers would be includible in the value of the cigarettes for the purpose of assessment of excise duty, the respondents resisted such claim on the plea of .promissory estoppel. The Supreme Court held that the Central Government and the Central Board of Excise and Customs were clearly bound by promissory estoppel to exclude the cost of corrugated fibre board containers from the value of the goods for the purpose of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s makes it perfectly clear that the Parliament has in no way abdicated its authority, but is keeping strict vigilance and control over its delegate (B.S. Garewal v. State of Punjab - AIR 1959 SC 512). That the legislature keeps control over the delegate is an indicia that it is a legislative power. 23. The Court further held that the power to fix the rate of tax was a legislative power. The statutory notifications issued under section 25(1) of the Act were from first to last legislative in character. The author of the notifications was the Central Government, no doubt, but the power that it weilded was legislative in character. Notifications issued under section 25(1) was an exercise of sovereignty, that is, of authority to legislate. The ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ation No. 216 was issued under section 25 of the Customs Act, 1962 exempting High Tenacity Viscose Staple Fibre from Customs duty completely. The said notification was not operative either indefinitely or for a fixed period and the power to issue such notification being a legislative power, there could be no promissory estoppel against exercise of such power. Exemption Notifications under section 25 are issued in public interest and where such public interest demands, it is within the discretion of the Government to withdraw such exemptions at any time. The decision of the Supreme Court in Union of India v. Godfrey Philips India Ltd. (Supra) can have no application here since in the said case there was representation made by the Central Boa ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
