CaseMinister
CaseMinister › Judgments › Supreme Court › 1996 › Delhi Cloth & General Mills Co. Ltd. & Anr. v. Union of Indi

Delhi Cloth & General Mills Co. Ltd. & Anr. v. Union of India & Anr.

Supreme Court of India · 19 September 1996 · [1996] SUPP. 6 S.C.R. 511

Court
Supreme Court of India
Decided
19 September 1996
Reported as
[1996] SUPP. 6 S.C.R. 511
Result
Dismissed
Bench
Bharucha S.P. (J)
Length
2 pages
Have a question about this judgment?

Ask our Legal AI about it on WhatsApp: free, no signup, in English or Hindi.

Write it first.

PETITIONER:
DELHI CLOTH & GENERAL MILLS CO. LTD. & ANR.
Vs.
RESPONDENT:
UNION OF INDIA & ANR.
DATE OF JUDGMENT: 19/09/1996
BENCH:
BHARUCHA S.P. (J)
VENKATASWAMI K. (J)

ACT

HEADNOTE

JUDGMENT

ORDER

A limited argument is addressed in this appeal that impugns the judgment and order of a Division Bench of the High Court of Rajasthan.

The appellants manufacture tyre yarn cord and fabric for which purpose they import tyre cord grade woodpulp from the United State of America. The appellants were called upon to pay additional duty thereon under the provisions of Sections 3 of the Customs Tariff Act.

Among other contentions raised by the appellants was this: The said woodpulp was not produced or manufactured in India. Under the terms of Section 3 additional duty had, therefore, to be calculated on the basis of the excise duty that would be leviable on the class or description of articles to which the said woodpulp belonged. There was no entry in the Tariff that related to an article of the like of the said woodpulp. Entry 68, being a residuary entry relating to no class or description of goods, did not apply. No additional duty was, therefore, leviable on the said woodpulp.

The said contention was rejected by the Assistant Collector and by the High Court in the writ petition filed the appellants.

It is the only contention raised before us.

Section 3 of the Customs Tariff Act, so far as it is relevant, reads thus:-

"S.3.- Levy of Additional Duty

equal to Excise Duty:

(1) Any article which is imported

into India shall, in addition, be

liable to a duty (hereinafter in

the section referred to as the

additional duty) equal to the

excise duty for the time being

leviable on a like article if

produced or manufactured in India

and if such excise duty on a like

article is leviable at any

percentage of its value, the

additional duty to which the

imported article shall be so liable

of the value of the imported

article.

Explanation:- In this section, the

expression the excise duty for the

article if being leviable on a like

article if produced or manufactured

in India means the excise duty for

the time being in force which would

be leviable on a like article if

produced or manufactured in India,

or if a like article is not so

produced or manufactured, which

would be leviable on the class or

description of articles to which

the imported article belongs, and

where such duty is leviable at

different rates, the highest duty,"

It is the Explanation which is important. The expression "the excise duty for the time being leviable on a like article if produced or manufactured in India used in the body of sub-section (1) is explained to mean the excise duty for the time being in force (a) which would be leviable on a like article if produced or manufactured in India, the excise duty that would be leviable on the class or description of articles to which the imported article belongs.

Where a like article is not produced or manufactured in India additional article upon the basis of the excise duty that is leviable on the class or description of articles to which the imported article belongs. Articles which are not elsewhere described, falling under the residuary Entry 68, form a class by themselves. Hence, if a like article is not described in the Tariff, additional duty is leviable on the imported article upon the basis of the levy of excise duty under the provisions of Entry 68.

The only contention raised before us is rejected.

The appeal is dismissed, with no order as to costs.

Ask CaseMinister about Delhi Cloth & General Mills Co. Ltd. & Anr. v. Union of India & Anr.

Your 24×7 legal assistant on WhatsApp answers with the judgments that apply, in English or Hindi. No signup needed.

Questions about this judgment, or a case like it?Ask on WhatsApp