9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2007 (11) TMI 317 - HC - CustomsCircular No. 8 of 2006 dated January 17 2006 and letter dated May 19 2006 seeked to be quashed - permission to mutilate imported used rails was rejected and it was directed that the same is required to be classified under CTH 7302 as disc - Held that - In the present case the issue regarding validity of the impugned circular has already been gone into by a Division Bench of Madras High Court in Madras Steel Re-rollers Association s case 2007 (6) TMI 222 - HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS and learned counsel for the respondent had not been able to point out as to on what account the conclusion arrived at by the Madras High Court can be said to be sub silentio per incuriam obiter dicta. Accordingly following the judgment in Madras Steel Re-rollers Association s case (supra) the impugned circular No. 8 of 2006 dated January 17 2006 and all proceedings consequent thereupon are declared illegal.
Issues Involved:
1. Legality of Circular No. 8 of 2006 and letter dated May 19, 2006. 2. Classification of imported used rails under Customs Tariff Act. 3. Applicability of customs duty rates for used rails under different chapter headings. 4. Authority and limits of the Central Board of Excise and Customs in issuing directives. 5. Validity of the impugned circular in light of judicial precedents. Issue-wise Detailed Analysis: 1. Legality of Circular No. 8 of 2006 and letter dated May 19, 2006: The petitioner challenged the circular and letter which rejected their request to classify imported used rails as scrap and directed classification under CTH 7302. The Court noted that the petitioner had previously been allowed to classify used rails under chapter heading 7204 as scrap, but the impugned circular changed this classification without basis. 2. Classification of imported used rails under Customs Tariff Act: The petitioner argued that used rails should be classified as scrap under chapter heading 7204 due to their unusability as rails. The Court examined the relevant provisions, including Section Note 8(a) to Section XV of the Customs Tariff Act, 1975, which defines waste and scrap as goods not usable due to breakage, cutting up, wear, or other reasons. The Court found that used rails, not being usable as such, should be classified as scrap under chapter heading 7204, supporting the petitioner's stance. 3. Applicability of customs duty rates for used rails under different chapter headings: The Court highlighted that waste and scrap under chapter heading 7204 are subjected to a 5% customs duty, while rails under chapter heading 7302 are subjected to a 12.5% duty. The petitioner argued that the change in classification led to an unjustified increase in duty rates. The Court agreed, noting that the previous classification under chapter heading 7204 with a lower duty rate was appropriate. 4. Authority and limits of the Central Board of Excise and Customs in issuing directives: The Court emphasized that the Board's directives cannot control the quasi-judicial powers of assessing authorities. Citing multiple precedents, including the Supreme Court's judgment in Orient Paper Mills v. Union of India, the Court held that the Board's circulars cannot dictate the classification of goods, which must be determined independently by the assessing authorities based on the facts of each case. 5. Validity of the impugned circular in light of judicial precedents: The Court referred to the judgment of the Madras High Court in Madras Steel Re-rollers Association v. Union of India, where the same circular was quashed. The Court underscored the principle that in the case of a Central Taxing Statute, the interpretation adopted by one Court should be followed unless it is manifestly erroneous. The Court found no reason to deviate from the Madras High Court's judgment, declaring the impugned circular illegal. Conclusion: The Court, following the precedent set by the Madras High Court, quashed Circular No. 8 of 2006 and all proceedings consequent thereupon. The petitioner's request for classification of used rails as scrap under chapter heading 7204 was upheld, and the writ petition was disposed of accordingly.
|
