Home
||
Export Import Policy & DGFT matters
|| Customs
matters || Central Excise matters ||
Shipping and Logistics Information
ieport.com - India's
Premier portal on EXIM matters
Circular
No.18/2000-Cus.
F.NO. 494/2/2000-Cus. VI
Government of India
Ministry of Finance
Department of Revenue
Central Board of Excise
& Customs
New Delhi,
the 13th March, 2000
Subject: Wheat Import
– Writ Petitions challenging duty
It is directed to inform that a number of writ peritions have been filed
in the High court of Chennai and in the Hight court of Kerala (Ernakulam
Bench) challenging the power of the Central Government vide Section 8A
of CTA’65 to impose duty on imported wheat vide Notification NO. 127/99
Customs dated 1.12.1999. the customs duty on imported wheat was raised
from ‘Free’ to 50%.
2.
In this connection this is to convey that in the counter-affidavits that
may be filed by the Commissioneers including on behalf on Union of India
the following may be mentioned:-
-
the Notification 127/99 customs
dated 1.12.1999 was issued under Section 8A of CTA that gives emergency
power to the Central Government to enhance the due rate. Further in terms
of Seciton7(3) the Notification 127/99 was duly approved by the Parliament.
(The Lok Sabha passed the resolution at the sitting held on 21st
December, 1999).
-
The comments of JS9TRU) to Commissioner
of Customs, Cochin may also be used while preparing a suitable counter-affidavit
(Annexure "A").
The total number of similar
cases pending in various courts, indication revenue involving may also
be intimated to the Board.
To : Shri T.K. Jayaraman Commissioner
of Customs, Cochin
From : T.R. Rustagi joint
Secretary (TRU0 FINREV0 New Delhi.
F.No. 354/56/99—TRU(.) Kindly
refer to your letter F.No. S32/180/99 AP(1) dated 28.12.99 regarding writ
Petition No. 32741/99 filed the Hon’ble High court of Kerala challenging
the authority of central Government to impose duty. On wheat through a
notification issued under Section 8A of the Customs Traiff Act, 1975(.).
The main issue raised by the petitioner is that since that rate of duty
prescribed in respect of wheat in the tariff was "Free" prior to 1.12.99,
it was not "leviable " to duty (.). according to him the Central Government
could have invoked the power to increase duty under Section 8A only if
wheat was leviable to duty in the first place (.). in this regard, he seeks
to make a distinction between "Free" rate and "Nil" rate and argues that
while nil rate constitutes a levy free [rate] does not(.) There does not
appear to be any basis for making this distinction(.) According to Section
12 to the Custom Act, 1962 "Duties of customs shall be levied at such rates
as may be specified under the Customs Tariff Act, 1975(.)" In respect of
goods falling under subheading Nos. 1001.10 and 1001.90 of the first schedule
to the Customs Tariff Act the rate of duty prescribed prior to 1.12.99
was "Free"(.) . When read in the light of Section 12, it is evident that
goods falling under these subheading were leviable to duty at "Free" rate
(.) Further, Notification No. 127/99 dated 1.12.99 whereby duty on wheat
was increased to 50% has already received the approval of Parliament (.)
Admission of the writ may be opposed accordingly (.) In view of the significance
of the issue raised in the writ your may request Additional Solicitor General,
Chennai to appear on behalf of the Central Government.