TMI Blog1981 (7) TMI 234X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 7; 67,961.50 said to be short-levy of duty on the ground that the proper classification was under Item 22(4)(a): On 24th December, 1973, the petitioner sent a reply to that notice of demand stating that when the goods were cleared he was under the genuine impression that the proper classification was under Item 28 and that he now understood that the goods were chargeable to duty at a higher rate under Item 22(4). By this letter the petitioner made a request to allow him to denature the goods as a special case. After a personal hearing given to the petitioner by the Assistant Collector (namely, the 2nd respondent), the 2nd respondent passed an order dated 30th September, 1975 confirming the demand notice dated 22nd December, 1973. On 26th December, 1975, the petitioner preferred an appeal to the Appellate Collector (namely, the 3rd respondent) which was rejected by the 3rd respondent by his order dated 24th March, 1976. The petitioner s revision application to the Central Government was also rejected on 15th April, 1977 by the 4th respondent on behalf of the Central Government. Hence the petitioner has filed the present petition for setting aside the notice of demand dated 22nd Dece ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... relevant year, N-Propyl Alcohol was classified as a chemical. In these circumstances, Mr. Taraporewala urged that the product imported by the petitioner being a chemical was correctly classified by him in the Bill of Entry under Item 28 assessable to duty at 60% ad valorem. 5. On the other hand, it was urged by Mr. Advani, the learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents, that it was only for the first time in the petition that the petitioner had raised the issue of the N-Propyl Alcohol falling under Item 28 and that prior thereto the petitioner had consistently admitted his error in classifying the product under Item 28 and had sought the benefit of the exemption notification dated 5th September, 1970. Mr. Advani urged that the respondents were justified in rejecting the petitioner s claim to the benefit under the notification dated 5th September, 1970 and holding that the imported product fell within Item 22(4) (a). 6. I shall deal with Mr. Advani s contentions straightaway and get them out of the way. To start with, at the earliest point of time, namely, in the notice of demand dated 22nd December, 1973, the stand taken by the department was that the duty was ass ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... emption notification. However, even the 3rd respondent s order dated 24th March, 1976 merely proceeds to reject the petitioner s plea for exemption under the notification and without even considering the petitioner s other contentions, proceeds to classify the goods as being attracted for duty under Item 22(4)(a). In the revision memo filed by the petitioner, a ground has specifically been taken that for the reasons stated therein the petitioner s goods fell under Item 28 and not under Item 22(4)(a). This has been adverted to by the revisional authority in its impugned order dated 15th April, 1977. But that is all. Merely setting out the petitioner s contentions is not tantamount to application of mind with regard thereto, and without doing so and on the wholly untenable basis that the petitioner claimed classification under Item 28 for the first time, the revisional authority held that the petitioner did not fall within the exemption notification and hence Item 22(4) (a) was attracted. As a tentative rider the penultimate sentence of the order states that in any event, the goods are not classifiable under Item 28 LT . Not a vestige of reasoning is given for this off-handed and pe ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... etitioner s N-Propyl Alcohol could not be brought under Item 22(4)(a). Being an un-potable organic solvent and a denaturing agent, it is clearly a chemical, assessable to duty under Item 28. Yet another aspect which clearly indicates that N-Propyl Alcohol is a chemical is to be found in the Import Trade Control Policy, 1972-73 (Vol. 1) itself where N-Propyl Alcohol is classified as a chemical. In the index it is shown under Part V of the Import Trade Control Schedule the serial numbers whereof are 22-31. Under Part V at page 51 serial No. 22(b) states Other Chemicals . The detailed policy regarding chemicals is to be found in Appendix 28 at page 196. This is yet another factor which brings to the forefront that N-Propyl Alcohol is a chemical and hence liable to duty not under Item 22(4)(a) but under Item 28. In H.R. Syien v. P.S. Lulla, 72 Bom. L.R. 534, it was held by this Court that entries in the Index attached to the Import Trade Control Schedule are of the nature of aids to construction not necessarily legal and binding but which aids should be invoked in the case of doubt or difficulty in order to throw light upon what was intended by the broad classification and broad entri ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
