TMI Blog1984 (9) TMI 298X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... vant Rules of the Maharashtra Municipalities(octroi) Rules, 1968(called the Rules). 3. Similarly on 8-1-1973, 30-1-1973 and 6-2-1973, it had imported three consignments consisting of 300 bundles of iron hoops, 5 drums of lubricating oil and 100 bundles of iron hoops respectively. It temporary detained these goods with itself for eventual export after making the requisite declaration and depositing the octroi thereon. It exported 280 bundles out of the first consignment and the whole of the second and third consignments on 9-5-1973 and 11-2-1973 respectively after obtaining permission. 4. The petitioner applied for refund of the amounts of octroi deposited in respect of the goods exported by it. However, the Council by its letters dated 24-8-1973 and 6-2-1976 has rejected the claim of the petitioners for refund. 5. The petitioner has given the particulars of the abovesaid goods in paragraphs 6.01 to 7.03,9.01and 9.02 of the petition and the two statements annexed to the application for amendment of the petition. The Council has not refuted them in its return. 6. The petitioner contends that the refusal on the part of the Council to refund the octroi paid or deposited in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... oods from any place within the octroi limits of a Council to any place outside such limits; 2(g) x x x x x x x x x x 2(h) import means bringing or entry of any good into the octroi limits of a Council from any place outside such limits; 2(i) importer means the person who imports any goods, and includes any person who owns the goods, at the time of the import; Clauses (c )and (d)of Rule 14(1)prescribe the forms in which an importer has to make declaration in respect of goods intended for temporary detention in the Bonded Warehouse maintained by a Council or with the importer himself and eventual export. Rules 19 and 20 prescribe the procedure to be followed for temporary detention of imported goods in Bonded Warehouse and eventual export and for export of goods so deposited. Rule 23 provides for refund of deposits made under Rule 20. Rules 24 and 25 lay down the procedure for temporary detention of dutiable goods for eventual export, with the importer himself and for export of such goods, Rule 28 provides for the refund of deposit made under Rule 24 at the time of import. Since it is not disputed that the petitioner had followed the procedure prescribed in Ru ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... troi limits within a period of six months of their import. Provided that the said period of six months shall not apply to goods imported by the food Corporation of India, established under section 3 of the Food Corporation Act, 1964. (c) The application for refund is supported by a duly certified written permission-cum refund export pass. (d) All the conditions in sub- rule (3)of rule 25 are fulfilled. (e) The amount claimed as refund is withdrawn within three months from the date of intimation to the importer to receive the amount. (f) The goods exported were declared to be intended for temporary detention with the importer and eventual export at the time of import. (3) The provisions of this rule shall apply mutatis mutandis to refund at any deposit claimed under sub-rule (3) of rule 18 where the goods arrive at the Exit Naka after 48 hours of the time of payment of the deposit as entered in the written permission-cum-transit pass. (4) This rule shall apply to the goods winch are imported within the octroi limits on or after the date on which this rule becomes effective in the municipal area concerned. 9. Let us first take up the case of th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... goods deposited in Bonded Warehouse maintained by a Council and for refund of deposit made while so exporting the goods, to suggest that the importer would not be entitled to refund of such deposit if he sells the goods so exported by him, within the municipal area where the Bonded Warehouse is situated. In other words, there is nothing in these rules to prohibit the importer from selling such goods within the municipal area if he intends to export them consequent to such sale. The documents on record show that it was the petitioner who had taken all the steps in that direction. The goods had been exported by the petitioner who was the importer and not by the consignees to whom the goods were sent on export. In ort opinion, the Council was not justified in rejecting the claim for refund on the ground it die and the petitioner was entitled to refund of the amount deposited in this behalf which amounts to ₹ 570/- 11. This brings us to the case of goods temporarily detained by the petitioner with itself for eventual export. Particulars are given in paragraphs 9.01 and 9.02 of the petition and also in the statement annexed to the application for amendment of the petition. In p ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... oods were exported. According to it, the ownership was to pass to the consignees only on delivery of the goods to them at their destination and after they paid the price thereof. It is submitted that the goods had been forwarded by the petitioner and the petitioner was the exporter. It is next contended that at any rate sale within the octroi limits by itself would not make the goods exigible to octroi unless it is for purpose of consumption or use of the goods sold within such limits. It is urged that if the goods are sold within the octroi limits and the buyers take them out of such limits without using or consuming within such limits, no octroi can be levied on such goods and the Municipal Council is liable to refund the octroi paid thereon if the goods had been imported with permission to temporarily detain them with the importer for eventual export within the prescribed time. For this proposition, reliance is sought to be placed on rulings of the Supreme Court in Burmah Shell Oil Co. v. Belgaum Borough Municipality and Hiralal v. Broach Municipality . 13. In Burmah Shell Company's case, the Supreme Court considered the concept and legislative history of octroi as a tax ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t mean that all the act of consumption just take place in the area of the municipality. It is sufficient if the goods are brought inside the area to be delivered to the ultimate consumer in that area because the taxable event is the entry of goods which are meant to reach an ultimate user or consumer in the area. Indeed, the consumer may never consume them as, for example, a motorist buys a tin of oil and finds that it does not suit his vehicle and leaves it lying on his shelf. The goods must be regarded as having been brought in for purposes of consumption when a person brings them either for his own use or consumption, or put them in the way of others in the area, who are to use and consume. In this process, the act of sale is merely the means for putting the goods in the way of others in the area, who are to use and consume. In this process, the act of sale is merely the means for putting the goods in the way of use or consumption. It is an earlier stage, the ultimate destination of the goods being 'use or consumption'. The earlier stage, namely, the sale by him, does not save the person who brought the goods into the local area from liability to the tax if the goods wer ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tself from tax in that case it had to follow the procedure laid down by rules for refund of taxes. 14. In Hiralal's case , a plea was made to reconsider the decision in Burmah Shell Company's case . The Supreme Court rejected it and affirmed the view taken in that case observing that the law on the subject had been laid down quite clearly in that case. 15. What has been said by the Supreme Court in Burmah Shell Company's case in the context of the provision contained in the Bombay municipal Boroughs Act, 1925 regarding octroi would apply with equal force to identical provisions contained in the Maharashtra Municipalities Act, which have been adopted former with slight modifications which are not material to the issue. 16. The position, therefore, which emerges from the decision of the Supreme Court is that an importer would be liable to pay octroi if he brings the goods within the octroi limits for his own use or consumption or for being sold by him direct to users or consumers or for being sold to dealers who in their turn sell the goods to users or consumers within the octroi limits irrespective whether such consumers by them for use or consumption in the a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
