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

1957 (4) TMI 54

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ssue. We shall accordingly state the facts of Petition No. 235 of 1956 in detail, and we are relived from the task of stating the facts of the other petitions. 3. The relevant are these, Messrs. Kanji Shavji Parekh is a registered partnership firm, having its principal place of business in Calcutta. The partners of the firm are citizens of India. The firm is an established importer of stationary articles and has quota rights for importing stationary items including goods known as "Artists' Materials" and described in Appendix 10 at pages 376 and 377 of the Import Trade Control Policy Book for the licensing period July to December 1954. On 4th August 1954, the Joint Chief Controller of Imports and Exports gave a license to the said firm, hearing after called the petitioners, to import goods known as "Artists' Material", falling under serial No. 168 (C) of part IV of the Policy Statement for the period July to December, 1954. Item 168 of the said statement related to                "articles made of paper and papier machie, stationery including drawing and copy books etc."Sub-item (c) related to" other articles" .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... item 45 (a) was assessing duty under item 45 (4) of the Indian Customs Tariff. The petitioners felt aggrieved by this order, because the duty payable under item 45 (a) was 39 3/8 percent. ad valorem while the duty payable under item 45 (4) was              "2 annas for every length of 7 1/2 inches or part thereof, or 66 2/3 percent. ad valorem, whichever was higher." The petitioners then represented their case to two successive Collectors of Customs, and on 26th April 1955, the Assistant Collector of Customs wrote to the petitioners to the following effect :              "I am directed to advise that the decision on the merits of the assessment of these Lyra brand half-sized coloured pencils having been taken by Collector's predecessor and duly communicated to you by an endorsement on the reverse of the bills of entry in question, Collector does not see his way to interfere in the matter and that in case you feel aggrieved with the said decision, the proper course is to follow the appeal procedure prescribed under section 188 of the Sea Customs Act." The peti .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... It is submitted by learned counsel that if 'Lyra' brand crayons are not crayons at all, then the licence which was granted to the petitioners on 4th August 1954 for importing crayons was not a valid licence for importing the goods in question; the Customs authorities however, accepted the licence as a good licence and yet proceeded on the erroneous assumption that 'Lyra' brand crayons were not crayons at all. This, according to learned counsel for the petitioners, is a manifestly erroneous assumption. Thirdly, learned counsel has contended that the right of the petitioners under cls. (f) and (g) of Art. 19 (1) of the Constitution, namely to hold their property and to carry on a trade, has been violated by reason of the orders in question. Lastly, learned counsel has pointed out that in certain other cases, the Customs authorities had assessed duty on similar goods under item 45 (a) of the Indian Customs Tariff, and therefore they have meted out unequal treatment to the petitioners. 6. At first sight, the last two grounds stated above apparently seem to involves question of enforcement of fundamental rights, for which purpose the petitioners have the guaranteed right to move this .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... the levy of customs duly on the coloured pencils as crayons was done in some cases merely through oversight, and when that was found out, the mistake was corrected inasmuch as in subsequent, imports the duty was levied under item 45 (4) of the Customs Tariff, and this has been regularly followed in cases of merchants who have imported these kinds of goods . I say that there are many other firms who have imported the coloured pencils and they have been assessed under item 45 (4) of the Customs Tariff, and therefore the petitioners are not entitled to make any grievance on that account." This, in our opinion, completely dispose of the argument as to unequal treatment. It may be stated here that, prior to 1st March 1951, coloured and copying pencils' were included under the head 'stationery not otherwise specified' in item 45 (4) of the Indian Customs Tariff. By the Indian Tariff (Amendment) Act, 1951, (Act XIII of 1951) item 45 (a) was inserted and this specifically related to 'coloured and copying pencils'. The duty then imposed was protective duty of 37 1/3 per cent. ad valorem. By the Indian Finance Act XIV of 1953, the duty was enhanced to 66 2/3 per cent. ad valorem. Then, in .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... importer to know the cornet I.T.C classification for any item because only then can he ascertain the appropriate authority to whom he should apply for an import licence and also judge for himself whether or not a licence licence is likely to be granted to him." We do not think that the aforesaid observations which relate to licensing policy have any bearing on the question at issue, namely, whether 'Lyra' brand crayons should be assessed under item 45(a) as stationery not otherwise specified or item 45(4), as coloured pencils. 9. For the reasons given above, we do not think that there is any substance in the contention urged on behalf of the petitioners that by the impugned orders there has been a violation of their fundamental right under Art. 19 or that there has been unequal treatment of the petitioners by the Customs authorities. On this short ground only the applications are liable to be dismissed. 10. With regard to the first two grounds urged on behalf of the petitioners it is abundantly clear that the petitioners have had a full hearing before two successive Collectors of Customs, Calcutta and their grievance as to the violation of the principles of natural justice is t .....

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