9911796707
TMI Blog2025 (5) TMI 417X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 7 (hereinafter referred to as 'the said Notification' / 'the impugned Notification'), the said duty was enhanced to 30%. The said notification, though issued on 17.11.2017, was published in the Official Gazette only on 20-11-2017. (iii) In November 2017, the appellant imported two consignments of crude palm oil (hereinafter referred to as 'the goods') from Singapore through vessels MT Express and MT Nan Lian 006, with M/s. Seaport Services Pvt. Ltd. as its agent (hereinafter referred to as 'the Agent'). In this respect, four bills of bearing nos. 4020900, 4023078, 4026088 and 4027996, all dated 16.11.2017, were filed for home consumption of the goods, assessing the BCD @ 15%, thereby duty payable amounting to Rs. 12,33,81,081/-. The Customs Authorities granted the entry inward for the said consignments on 18.11.2017 and 19.11.2017 respectively. (iv) Subsequently, the Customs Authorities assessed the applicable BCD as 30% as duty in force on the date of entry inward in accordance with proviso to Section 15 of the Customs Act, 1962 thereby demanding the excess duty. Consequently, the appellant deposited the differential duty, under protest, to clear the goods for ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ffect, as the intended audience cannot be deemed to have knowledge of it until such publication occurs. (iii) It is important to highlight that Section 25(1) of the Act empowers the Central Government to exempt, wholly or partially, any goods of a specified description from customs duty through a notification published in the Official Gazette. However, with effect from 14.05.2016, Section 25(4) stipulates that, unless otherwise specified, every notification issued under Section 25(1) shall take effect from the date it is issued by the Central Government for publication in the Official Gazette, thereby creating contradiction with the mandate under Section 25(1). (iv) In this regard, reliance is placed on the decision in the case of Ruchi Soya Industries Vs. Union of India [2021 (375) E.L.T. 497 (Guj.)], wherein the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court declared Section 25(4) of the Act as arbitrary and contrary to Section 25(1) and (2A) of the Act. The High Court directed the Department to refund the excess amount collected from the petitioner as per the Notification No. 29/2018-Cus dated 01.03.2018 which was published in Official Gazette on 06.03.2018 that was after the date of filing of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... issioner, Mini Customs House, Haldia, (CPIO) categorically confirmed that the IGMs generated from the ICES system for both consignments accompanied the cargo declaration, crew list and store list. (x) Thereafter, in terms of Section 31 of the Act, the onus was on the customs authorities to grant entry inward. Although no strict timeline is prescribed under Section 31 for grant of entry inward, judicial precedents have established that entry inward must be granted expeditiously, with least possible delay. In this regard reliance is placed on the case of Mafatlal Industries Ltd. Vs. UOI [1993 (63) ELT 616 (Guj.)], affirmed in 1994 (72) ELT A142 (SC). In the said case, the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court also observed that ideally, the date of submission of the notice of readiness by the master should be the date of grant of entry inward. (xi) Further, vide reply dated 05.02.2025 to RTI application, the CPIO, stated that entry inward is granted as soon as the boarding officer receives the entry inward documents and no delay occurs unless there is a discrepancy in such documents. (xii) In the instance case, the master duly tendered the notice of readiness on 15.11.2017 for both consig ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 20-11-2017 8.1. On going through the said facts, it is seen that the dates of arrival of the consignments are 14.11.2017 and 15.11.2017 and the Bills of Entry were filed by the appellant on 16.11.2017. The duty was also paid on the same day. We observe that although the said Notification is having the date as 17.11.2017, the same was published in the Official Gazette on 20.11.2017. 9. Section 15 of the Customs Act, 1962 prescribes the date for determination of rate of duty and the tariff value of imported goods, as under: - " Customs Act, 1962 SECTION 15. Date for determination of rate of duty and tariff valuation of imported goods. (1) The rate of duty and tariff valuation, if any, applicable to any imported goods, shall be the rate and valuation in force, - (a) in the case of goods entered for home consumption under section 46, on the date on which a bill of entry in respect of such goods is presented under that section, (b) in the case of goods cleared from a warehouse under section 68, on the date on which a bill of entry for home consumption in respect of such goods is presented under that section; (c) in the case of any other goods, on the date of payment of duty ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... OF THE FOLLOWING GOVERNMENT STOCKS 20-NOV-2017 22-NOV-2017 NOT AVAILABLE (180356) 2. MINISTRY OF FINANCE DEPARTMENT OF FINANCIAL SERVICES NOT APPLICABLE WHEREAS, THE USE OF AADHAAR AS IDENTITY DOCUMENT FOR DELIVERY 20-NOV-2017 22-NOV-2017 NOT AVAILABLE (180346) 3. MINISTRY OF FINANCE DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE NOT APPLICABLE WHEREAS, THE DESIGNATED AUTHORITY VIDE INITIATION NOTIFICATION NO 17-NOV-2017 21-NOV-2017 NOT AVAILABLE . (180328) 4. MINISTRY OF FINANCE DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE CENTRAL BOARD OF DIRECT TAXES IT IS HEREBY NOTIFIED FOR GENERAL INFORMATION THAT THE ORGANIZATION MS INTERNATIONAL CROPS RESEARCH INSTITUTE FOR THE SEMI ARID TROPICS 17-NOV-2017 20-NOV-2017 NOT AVAILABLE (180324) 5. Ministry of Finance Department of Revenue Not Applicable CENTRAL GOVERNMENT BEING SATISFIED THAT IT IS NECESSARY IN THE PUBLIC INTEREST SO TO DO HEREBY MAKES THE FOLLOWING FURTHER AMENDMENTS 17-Nov-2017 20-Nov-2017 NOT AVAILABLE (180322) 6 MINISTRY OF FINANCE DEPARTMENT OF ECONOMIC AFFAIRS NOT APPLICABLE WITH THE APPROVAL OF THE COMPETENT AUTHORITY, AN UPDATED HARMONIZED MASTER LIST OF INFRASTRUCTURE 17-NOV-2017 18-NOV-2017 NOT AVAILABLE ( ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... serious absurdity, confusion or friction, contradiction and conflict between its various provisions, the same is illegal and amendment of sub-section (4) of Section 25 giving effect to the notification from the date of its issue for publication in the Gazette is an arbitrary exercise of power by the Legislature and it is totally contrary to the purport of sub-section (1) and sub-section (2A) of Section 25 of the Act, which mandates publication of notification in the Official Gazette. Therefore, to avoid inconvenience, serious absurdity, confusion or friction, contradiction and conflict between various provisions, amended provision of sub-section (4) of Section 25 which is enacted by arbitrary exercise of power by the Legislature, is liable to be struck down. 77. The notification was published on 6-3-2018 which is impugned in these writ petitions, published electronically on 6-3-2018. In view of the decision taken by the Government of India in terms of Section 8 of the Income-tax Act, to avoid physical printing of Gazette notification to publish the same exclusively by electronic mode, so as to attribute knowledge to the public at large. The notification was signed by Rakesh Sukul ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... that the appellate authority or Tribunal cannot declare any provision in the statute as illegal or arbitrary. Therefore, we find no force in the argument of the Learned Counsel for the respondents and the same is rejected. 80. In view of our foregoing discussion, Section 25(4) of the Customs Act is declared as arbitrary and contrary to Section 25(1) and (2A) of the Customs Act, 1962 and that the respondents are liable to repay the amount collected from the petitioners for clearance of imported goods for home consumption beyond the original rate prevailing on the date of prior to date of publication of notification i.e. Rs. 2,88,16,200/- with interest paid by the petitioner from the date of deposit till the date of payment. 81. In the result, writ petitions are allowed." 19. The aforesaid reasons squarely apply, to which no plausible answer could be given by the Learned Counsel for the respondents. 20. The issues already having been raised and decided, we have not been able to gather any other different reason to keep this matter pending, and adopting the reasoning given by the Andhra Pradesh High Court in Ruchi Soya Industries Ltd. (supra), we allow the writ petition on the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
