TMI Blog1981 (11) TMI 63X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ware, stainless steel utensils, surgical instruments, etc. For the purpose of manufacturing its products, the petitioner requires stainless steel sheets, strips and circles as also imported Heat Resistance Steel (H.R.S.). The petitioner imported one consignment of heat Resistance Stainless Steel strips in coils of 48" width in eight crates from Switzerland to Bombay per S.S. Schwerin. The weight of the consignment was 25.995 Kgs. The strips were of AISI 309, 26 guage, (i.e. 0.5 mm). The number, the date of Bill of Entry and the C.I.F. value of the consignment are as follows :- E/E Cash No. 5995, dated 27-9-1971....Rs. 1,88,455-00 The above-mentioned Bill of Entry was filed for clearance before the Assistant Collector of Customs (Appraising), C. Group, Bombay (the 4t respondent herein) on 1-9-1971. 3. It is alleged that by oversight the petitioner paid customs duty on the goods equivalent to 100% of the C.I.F. value of the goods, as per the assessment of the 4th respondent classifying the goods under Item No. 63 (20A) of the Indian Customs Tariff (I.C.T.). Later on, the petitioner realised that the goods fell under Item No. 63(14) and not Item No. 63(20A) of the I.C.T. In view ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nferred by sub-section (1) of Section 25 of the Customs Act, 1962, the rate of duty on `cold rolled hoops and strips of stainless steel 250 mm width or more', classified under Item No. 63(14) of the Schedule was reduced to 10% ad valorem. The case of the petitioner is that it imported strips of stainless steel of 250 mm width, that the goods imported were liable to customs duty at 10% ad valorem, that the goods suffered customs duty at the rate of 100% ad valorem treating the same as `Sheets' falling under Item No. 63(20A) and that it is entitled to refund of excise duty illegally levied on the goods and collected from it. 5. The only reason assigned by the 3rd respondent in his order dated 3-4-1973 rejecting the claim of the petitioner is that it was noticed from the duty bill that the goods were assessed under Item No. 63(20A) as `stainless sheets' and not `strips' falling under Item No. 63(14). The reason assigned by the 3rd respondent is no reason at all. 6. Two reasons are given by the 2nd respondent in his order dated 9-1-1975 rejecting the appeal preferred by the petitioner assailing the order of the 3rd respondent : (1) The notification dated 20-8-1965 applies to strips ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ct entry, the basis of the classification is not open to question. Technical and scientific tests offer guidance only within limits. One the articles are in circulation and come to be described and known in common parlance, we then see no difficulty for statutory classification under a particular Entry." 11. In India International Industries v. S.T. Commissioner, U.P., AIR 1981 S.C. 1079, it was held :- "It is well settled that in interpreting items in statutes like the Excise Tax Acts or Sales Tax Acts, whose primary object is to raise revenue and for which purpose they classify diverse products, articles and substances, resort should be had not the scientific and technical meaning of the terms or expressions used but to their popular meaning, that is to say, the meaning attached to them by those dealing in them. If any term of expression has been defined in the enactment then it must be understood in the sense in which it is defined but in the absence of any definition being given in the enactment the meaning of the term in common parlance or commercial parlance has to be adopted." 12. As already stated, the expressions `sheet' and `strip' were not defined in the Indian Tar ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... given by the American Iron and Steel Institute or contained in the Brussel's Nomenclature ignoring the meaning attached to the said articles in Indian commercial parlance or by those dealing in the said articles in our country is wholly unreasonable. The first respondent erred in treating the goods in question as `sheets' on the ground that the goods were of 48" width and on the assumption that such goods were known as `sheets' in the trade. The notification expressly grants concessional levy of duty on strips of stainless steel of 250 mm width (10") or more. There is no warrant for the assumption on the part of the first respondent that the goods in question were known as `sheets' in the trade. As already stated, according to the ISI, the goods in question are `wide strips' having been imported in coiled form. 16. The other reason assigned by the first respondent for treating the goods in question as `sheets' is that in the invoice it is described that the goods were supplied as per AISI 309 and that according to AISI a sheet is of a width of 24" and over, while a strip has a width of under 24". This reason is also untenable as the specification "AISI 309" in the invoice refers ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... In the mass of documents filed before us and the extensive arguments addressed at the bar with regard to the definitions culled from various dictionaries, handbooks and authorities, we are not at all surprised that the three authorities came to the same conclusion by depending upon their own chosen tests. A particular type of strip may according to certain definitions be skelp and according to others not skelp. This, however, cannot be permitted in a fiscal legislation which by all standards should adopt a clear definition of an excisable item which is incapable of giving rise to a confounding controversy as in this case unless matter is beyond doubt in view of the popular meaning or meaning ascribed to the term in commercial parlance. In absence of any clear criterion to determine what is skelp and not strip, no useful purpose would be served by even remanding the matter to the Excise authorities for a decision after taking necessary evidence. It is only when a taxing law provides for a clear and unequivocal test for determination as to whether a particular product would fall under strip or skelp it may be possible for the authorities to address itself to the evidence submitted by ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ent of India, which runs thus : "For the purpose of interpretation of the import policy specified in Appendix 41, the meaning and definition of various steel items mentioned in this Appendix shall be the same as those contained in the latest revision of IS : 1956-1962 (Glossary of Terms relating to Iron and Steel)." It was contended on behalf of the petitioner that while classifying articles of steel imported, the meaning and definition of the said article mentioned in the I.S.I. Glossary should be adopted. On behalf of the Union of India, reliance was placed upon the classification of `strips' and `sheets' given in the Brussel's Tariff Nomenclature which was adopted in India and statutorily incorporated in the Customs Tariff Act, 1975. While conceding that the provisions of Customs Tariff Act, 1975 had not application as the goods were imported prior to 1975, it was, however, urged on behalf of the Union of India that the classification of the goods as `sheets' by the Customs authorities was in conformity with the well known international commercial practice and that the view taken by the customs authorities was reasonable and not perverse. Jayachandra Reddy J., by his order d ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Co. Ltd., observed : "It is also seen that in the Brussel's Tariff Nomenclature too the dividing line between strips and sheets is at 500 mm. Item 73.12 of the B.T.N. specifies the maximum limit of width as 500 mm for strips and Item 73.13 indicates that the width in excess of 500 mm would render the goods classifiable as sheets (or plates). The B.T.N. has not yet been adopted in India, but should yet provide guidelines for technical matters, as it is a system of classification, into the preparation of which considerable technical expertise has gone, and it is also adopted by a number of countries all over the world and particularly when it happens to be in line with the standard specifications in India." 22. It may be noted that the classification of `strips' and `sheets' as given in the Brussel's Tariff Nomenclature should not have been relied upon by the first respondent as it does not conform to the classification of `strip' and `sheet' given by the ISI during the relevant period. 23. It was urged by Sri K. Subrahmanya Reddy, learned Counsel for the Union of India, that the goods imported by the petitioner were in the shape of sheets and not in coiled form as noticed by t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... employed in 1961 Act may be relied upon as a Parliamentary exposition of the earlier Act even on the assumption that the language employed in Section 3 of the earlier Act is ambiguous. It is clear that the word `individual' in Section 3 of the 1922 Act includes within its connotation all artificial juridical persons and this legal position is made explicit and beyond challenge in the 1961 Act." The decision relied upon by the learned Counsel for the Union of India is of no assistance as `strip' and `sheet' were not at all defined in the repealed Indian Tariff Act. 26. Lastly it was urged by the learned Counsel for the Union of India that while quashing the impugned orders of the first respondent, the first respondent might be directed to determine the question whether the goods imported by the petitioner were stainless `sheets' or `strips' and dispose of the revision petition of the petitioner afresh. In my opinion, no useful purpose will be served by remitting the matter to the first respondent after quashing the order of the first respondent, as there is no identifiable standard or test to determine clearly which product could be treated as `sheet' and not `strip' during the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
