M/S. JASWAL NECO LTD. versus COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS, VISAKHAPATNAM

Citation: [2015] 8 S.C.R. 873 · Decided: 04-08-2015 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: A.K. SIKRI · Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed

Judgment (excerpt)

(2015] 8 S.C.R. 873 
M/S. JASWAL NECO LTD. 
v. 
COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS, VISAKHAPATNAM 
(Civil Appeal No.7189 OF 2005) 
AUGUST 4, 2015. 
1! 
[A.K. SIKRI AND R.F. NARIMAN, JJ.] 
A 
B 
Customs Tariff (Identification, Assessment and 
Collection of Antidumping Duty on Dumped Articles and for c 
Determination of Injury) Rules, 1995- r. 20(2)(a) - Import of 
Low Ash Metallurgical Coke - By manufacturer of pig iron 
using a blast furnace - Non-payment of Anti-dumping Duty 
levied u/s. 9A of Customs Tariff Act, 1975 in view of 
·Exemption Notification - lmporter-assessee failed to fulf111 D 
its export obligation in terms of the exemption Notification -
Relevant period June 1998 to August 1998 - Demand of 
Anti-dumping Duty - Authority concerned confirmed the 
demand and directed the assessee to pay the duty under 
the Notification dated 27.10.1998 - Appeal to Tribunal by E 
the assessee - Tribunal increased the anti-dumping duty 
applying the higher rates specified by the final Notification 
No. 6912000 dated 19.5.2000 '- On appeal, held: The 
assessee is liable to pay anti-dumping duty- The exemption 
under the Notification dated 19.05.2000 to the imports of F 
Metcoke by a manufacturer of pig iron using a blast furnace, 
is not applicable to the appellant-assessee - However, the 
assessee is liable to pay ant1~dumping Duty as specified 
under Notification No. 81198 dated 27.10.1998 and not as G 
specified under Notification dated 19. 05. 2000 (as increased 
by the Tribunal)- Tribunal could not have enhanced the rate 
of anti-dumping duty in the assessee 'sown appeal- Customs 
Tariff Act, 1975 - s. 9A - Notification No. 81198 dated 
27. 10. 1998 - Notification No. 6912000 dated 19. 05. 2000. 
873 
H 
874 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
[2015] 8 S.C.R. 
A 
Interest- On customs duty - On the ground that the 
duty was paid after issuance of show-cause notice - Import 
of Low Ash Metallurgical coke - By manufacturer of pig iron 
- Non-payment of 'Basic Customs Duty' levied u/s. 12 of the 
Customs Act, 'Special Customs duty' levied uls. 68 of 
B Finance Act, 1996 and 'Special Additional duty' levied u/s. 
3A of Customs Tariff Act, 1975-Forthe period June 1998 to 
August 1998- The above duties were exempt under different 
Notifications - The importer-assessee, at the time of import 
had furnished a bond to pay the duties on the imported goods 
C in the event offailure to fulfill its export obligation in terms of 
the notifications - Failure of the assessee to fulfill its export 
obligation - Demand of duty-Assessee paid the entire duty 
after the demand- The authority concerned imposed interest 
0 
on the duty paid @ 24% on the ground that duty was paid 
after issuance of show-cause notice - The Tribunal reduced 
the interest to 15% - On appeal, held: As per Notification No. 
30of1997 interest@ 24% is payable only when the importer 
executes the bond in which such interest is stated to be 
E payable -
The bond executed in the present case says 
nothing about the interest payable in case the conditions 
under the Notification No.30197 are not met - Customs Act 
also contains no provision for levy of interest at the relevant 
time - s. 18(3) of the Customs Act providing for levy of such 
F interest was only added w.e.f. 13-7-2006- Levy of interest 
can only be by substantive provision and such levy can only 
be prospective - The assessee was not liable to pay interest 
- Customs Act, 1962- ss. 12 and 18(3) - Finance Act, 1996 
- s. 68- Customs Tariff Act, 1975- s. 3A - Notification No. 301 
G 97CUS dated 1.4.1997. 
Customs Tariff Act, 1975 - ss. 3(2) and 3A(2) -
'Additional duty' and 'Special Additional Duty' - Calculation 
of - Whether would include 'Anti-dumping Duty' - Held: In 
H view of s.23 of Finance Act, 1963 which uses the same 
MIS. JASWAL NECO LTD. v. COMMISSIONER OF 
875 
CUSTOMS, VISAKHAPATNAM 
expressions as used In s. 3(2) ands. 3A(2), the expression A 
"in addition" in ss. 3(2) and 3A(2) refers to only a surcharge 
or; an additional duty of customs - Therefore, "Anti-dumping 
duty" would not be included in ''Additional duty" and "Special 
· Additional Duty" - Customs Tariff (Identification, Assessment 
and Collection of Anti-dumping Duty on Dumped Articles and B 
for Determination of Injury) Rules, 1995- Finance Act, 1963 
- ss. 23 and 24(3). 
_ '« 
Customs Act, 1962- Import of Low Ash Metallurgica~ 
Coke - By manufacturer of pig iron - Non-payment of C 
customs duty .:_ Non-fulfillment of export obligations by the 
impoit

Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.