The High Court of Calcutta presided by Mr. Justice Md. Nizamuddin has held that subsequent publication of Notification has no power to increase the rate of Customs duty with retrospective effect.
The petitioner, M/s. Ruchi Soya Industries Ltd. entered into contracts with its foreign supplier for the import of 14000 MTs of Crude Palm Oil of Edible Grade in Bulk. The tariff value of the subject goods was fixed at the rate of 755 USD PMT vide notification No. 100/2020-Customs (N.T.) dated 15.10.2020 issued under Section 14 (2) of the Customs Act, 1962.The respondent customs authority charged the enhanced rate of duty on the goods on the basis of the Notification No. 103/2020-Customs (N.T.) dated 29.10.2020 which was e-gazetted and digitally signed on 29.10.2020 at 23:18:25 hrs. The aggrieved petitioner filed a Writ petition before the High Court.
The counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant submitted that the Tariff Value of the subject goods was enhanced from USD 755MT to USD 782 MT while it is an admitted position substantiated by the record that bills of entry relating to goods in question were already self-assessed on 23.10.2020 and 26.10.2020 at the prevailing rate of duty and Entry inward was granted to the vessel in question carrying the subject goods on 29.10.2020 at 11:00 hrs which is the time prior to the time of coming into effect the aforesaid E-Gazetted Notification dated 29.10.2020 at 23:18:25 hrs
The single bench observed that the duty was correctly assessed at the time of self-assessment in terms of the duty which was in force on that date and at the time. The subsequent publication of the notification did not furnish a valid basis for re-assessment. Section 8A does not provide power to increase of the rate of duty with retrospective effect, the Notification must be treated as having come into force, not before its publication
The High Court has held that“the respondents/authorities concerned are directed to refund to the petitioners the excess duty amounting to Rs. 96,60,467/- which was collected by the respondent customs authority on the basis of the aforesaid impugned Notification No. 103/2020-Customs (N.T.) dated 29th October, 2020 at a higher tariff value”.
Adv. Mr. Rajesh Rawal and Adv. Mr. B.P. Banerjee appeared on behalf of the petitioner and respondent respectively.
Subscribe Taxscan Premium to view the JudgmentSupport our journalism by subscribing to Taxscan premium. Follow us on Telegram for quick updates
