LexTAMIL NADU NEWSPRINT AND PAPERS LTD. versus THE APPRAISER APPRAISING, DEPARTMENT,CUSTOMS HOUSE AND ORS.
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
TAMIL NADlJ NEWSPRINT AND PAPERS LTD. v. THE APPRAISER APPRAISING, DEPARTMENT, CUSTOMS HOUSE AND ORS. JANUARY 20, 2000 [DR. A.S. ANAND, 0., S. RAJENDRA BABU AND R.C. 'LAHOTI, JJ.) Customs Act 1962: Section 25(1). Customs Tariff Act, 1975 : Item 84.66 and 84.31. Customs Tariff-Notification No. 62183 dated J.3.1983-Exemption from payment of auxiliary duty-Entitlement to-No:ification 61/83 dated A B c 1.3.83--Applicability of. D Assessee-lmport of certain items of machinery pursuant to a specific contract registered with customs authorities for import of machinery falling under Item 84.66-Assessee availed concession pursuant to that rr:gistered contract in the matter of payment of basic customs duty as well as additional duty in temis of Notification No. 268/76 dated 2.8.1976-Thereafter assessee E claimed exemption from payment of auxiliary under Notification No. 62/83-Single Judge of High Court held that assessee was entitled to receive benefit of Notification No. 62181--0n appeal by Revenue, Division Bench reversed the decision of Single Judgc-Assessee preferred appeal before Supreme Cowt--Benefit in payment of basic duty and additional duty, in F terms of Notification No. 268176 dated 2.8.1976, has already been obtained by the appellant for importing the machinery as per a contract registered with the Customs Authorities under Tariff Item 84.66-Having so obtained that benefit by claiming the imported machinery to be covered by tariff item 84.66, it was not open to the appellant later on to canvass much less claim that the machinery in question is covered by tariff Item 84.31, for receiving the benefit G of total exemption under Notification 62/83 and that it is not liable to pay auxiliary duty at the reduced rate of 20% on goods failing under tariff item 84.66 under Notification No. 61183-Therefore the appellant is not entitled to the benefit of total exemption from payment of auxiliary duty under Notifica- tion 62/83. H 327 328 SUPREME COURT REPORTS (2000) 1 S.C.R. A CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION : Civil Appeal Nos. 5867-69 of 1994. From the Judgment and Order dated 28.1.88 of the Madras High Court in W.A. Nos. 2012-14 of 1987. B V.R. Reddy, Soli J. Sorabjee, Anil B. Divan, Dr. L. M. Singhvi, c Ambrish Kumar, Somayji for the Appellants. T.L.V. Iyer, Joseph Vallabh Pillai, A.K. Ganguli, T.C. Sharma, P. Parmeswaran, A. Subba Rao, V.K. Verma, A.K. Srivastava for the Respon- dents. The following Order of the Court was delivered : These appeals, by special leave have put in issue the judgment of the Division Bench of the High Court of Madras, dated 28th January, 1988 D setting aside the judgment of a learned Single Judge dated 7th September, 1987 in a batch of Writ Petitions. The short question which requires our consideration is : Whether in the facts and circumstances of this case the appellant is entitled to the benefit of the Exemption Notification No. 62/83, dated 1.3.83 issued by the E Government of India in exercise of the powers under Section 25(1) of the Customs Act, 1962? The question arises in the following circumstances : The appellant imported certain items of machinery pursuant to a specific contract registered with the Customs Authorities for import of machinery falling under Item 84.66 of the Customs Tariff Act, 1975. The F appellant has admittedly enjoyed the concession pursuant to that registered contract in the matter of payment of basic custom duty as well as additional duty. The appellant after having enjoyed that benefit also claimed benefit of total exemption from payment of Auxiliary Duty under Notification 62/83, Customs, dated 1.3.1983. According to the appellant, since Notifica- tion 62/83 was issued to grant total exemption from Auxiliary Duty on 19 G items in view of GA IT agreement, the appellant was also entitled to its benefit since the machinery imported by him fell under one of the 19 items. . According to the Revenue, however, the appellant was not entitled to claim benefit of Exemption Notification 62/83, dated 1.3.1983 having imported the machinery pursuant to the specific contract registered under heading 84.66 and that the appellant had to bear the auxiliary duty to the extent H given in Notification 61/83, Customs, dated l.3.i983 vide which the auxiiiarY - .... TA.'dlL NADU NEWSPRINT AND PAPERS LTD. >. APPRAl~!NO AP RAISER DPTT. CUSTOMS HOUSE 329 duty on Item 84.66, besides some other items, had been red
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.