Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

1988 (7) TMI 72

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... and of Mr. K. Gopal, Advocate for the 1st respondent, and of Mr. P. Narasimhan, Senior Central Government Standing Counsel on behalf of the 2nd respondent, and the 3rd respondent not appearing in person or by the advocate, the Court made the following Order :- The writ petition is for the issue of a writ of certiorari to call for the records of the 1st respondent in Met/SS/Strips/81 dated 7.7.1981 and quash the same. 2. It is inter alia stated in the affidavit sworn to by the Managing Partner of the petitioner firm that the petitioner is engaged in manufacturing stainless steel utensils, watch straps and pen nibs and the raw materials for the said manufacture are imported through the 1st respondent. For this purpose the 3rd respondent .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... t .500 M.T. of stainless steel supplied and 1189.890 kgs. in the case of second item of manufacture as against 1.500 M.T. supplied. The differences in weight as indicated above were due to wastage in manufacturing process. While so, the petitioner received a letter dated. 7.7.1981 from the 1st respondent stating that the Customs authorities are demanding differential duty for the wastage quantity mentioned in the End-Use Certificate and that the petitioner should remit the difference of Rs. 8152.56 and further threatening the petitioner to recover the amount from the bank which gave bank guarantee for the amount. According to the petitioner the said demand notice Met/SS/Strips/81 dated 7.7.1981 of the 1st respondent is illegal and in violat .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... age incurred in the process of manufacture. What we are concerned is whether such wastages come within the purview of Customs Notification dated 15.7.1977. The Customs Notification No. 152/77 dated 15.7.1977 reads as follows : "In exercise of the powers conferred by sub-section (1) of Section 25 of the Customs Act, 1962 (52 of 1962), and in supersession of the notification of the Government of India in the Department of Revenue and Banking, No. 78-Customs, dated the 18th June, 1977, the Central Government, being satisfied that it is necessary in the public interest so to do, hereby exempts the goods specified in the column (2) of the Table hereto annexed and falling under sub-heading No. (2) of Heading No. 73.15 of the First Schedule to t .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... careful reading of the above notification, clearly shows that the imposition of any standard duty cannot at all be attracted unless it is proved to the satisfaction of the Assistant Collector of Customs that the entire metal that had been supplied was not used for the purpose of manufacture, for which the metal had been supplied. This is clear from proviso (1) of the Notification No. 152/77, dated 15.7.1977 of the 1st respondent, which runs as follows :- Proviso (1) of Notification 152/77, dated 15.7.1977. "In respect of the said goods as are of a thickness of 16 BG or more, the importer or the manufacturer, as the case may be, binds himself by the execution of a bond in such form and for such sum as may be specified by the Assistant Co .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... respondent clearly admits that there is no specific provision available in the Customs Notification above extracted as to how the wastages occurring in the process of manufacture, can be dealt with for levying standard duty. In the absence of any such specific provision for imposition of standard duty on wastages as occurred in the present case, it is not open to the authorities concerned to levy standard duty on such wastages and any such imposition of standard duty in the absence of specific provision in the Notification issued by the Customs under Ref. No. 152/77 dated 16.7.1977 to that effect is not legal and is contrary to law. 7. It is again and again submitted by the learned counsel for the first respondent that the petitioner is .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates