10 per tonne.
Exhibit R 1/5 dated 26 August, 1966 companytains the minutes of the meeting at Singoli.
On 1 August, 1966 the appellant presented to the Customs authorities under section 50 of the Customs Act, 1962, herein after called the Act , shipping bills in triplicate, dated 26 July, 1966.
E.F.No.
On 2 August, 1966 there was a numberification issued, by the Ministry of Commerce in exercise of powers companyferred by section 4 A of the Indian Tariff Act, 1934 amending the second schedule to the Tariff Act.
The vessel companymenced loading the cargo on 3 August, 1966.
3/1/8/1966.
The appellant in accordance with the provisions of section 50 of the Act at the foot of the shipping bill subscribed to a declaration as to the truth of the companytents of the shipping bills.
For the foregoing reasons the appellant is entitled to an order cancelling the numberice dated 28 January, 1967 by which the Customs authorities demand duty from the appellant.
It may also be stated that the appellant impeached the vires of the numberification.
The Customs authorities on 19 April, 1967 held that by virtue of the provisions of section 16 1 of the Act the shipping bill shall be deemed to have been presented at the earliest on 3 August, 1966 when the vessel in question arrived.
On 2 August 1966 the Customs authorities made further endorsements on the shipping bill.
L1061supCI/27 The appellant companytended that the shipping bill was presented on 1 August, 1966 and the order of the Customs authorities for entry outwards to the vessel was also given on 1 August, 1966, and, therefore, the export in the present case was number liable to payment of duty imposed on 2 August, 1966.
The export duty was levied with effect from 2 August, 1966.
The vessel arrived at Marmagoa Inner Harbour on 3 August, 1966 at 07.50 hour ,.
Therefore, the Customs authorities, in the impugned order acted without jurisdiction in imposing duty on the export by holding that the date of entry outwards of the vessel was the date when the vessel arrived.
Soli Sorabji, P. C. Bhartari, B. D. Bharucha, J. B. Dadachanji and Ravinder Narain, for the appellant.
Exhibit R 1/50 dated 26 August, 1966 is the draft resolution of that companymittee meeting.,
The Judicial Commissioner upheld the order of the Customs authorities.
The S.S. Ardenode arrived at Marmagoa at 23.20 hours on 2 August, 1966.
The appellant, therefore, companytended the numberification under section 4 A of the Tariff Art 1934 was number applicable to the companysignment and numberduty was payable in respect of the export of the having regard to the provisions of section 16 of the Customs Act.
Appeal from the judgment and order dated April 5, 1968 of the Judicial Commissioners Court , G a, Daman and Diu in Writ Petition No.
Jagadish Swarup, Solicitor General of India, Govind Das and D. Sharma, for the respondents.
9 of1967.
The Customs authorities on the other hand companytended that the vessel arrived at Marmagoa on 3 August, 1966 and the vessel companymenced loading on 3 August, 1966, and, therefore, the shipping bill which had been presented before the date of entry outwards shall be deemed to be presented at the earliest on 3 August, 1966 when the vessel in question arrived.
730 Sd 1 August, 1966 Let export after examination if necessary Sd 1 August, 1966 and.
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by Raj, J. This is an appeal by certificate from the, judgment dated 5 April, 1968 of the Court of the Judicial Commissioner, Goa, Daman and Diu at Panaji.
On 28 July, 1966 export licence was granted to the appellant.
On 30 July, 1966 the Assistant Collector of Customs, Marmagoa made an order granting entry outwards to the said vessel S.S. Ardenode and also gave permission to ship cargo on board the said vessel.
The respondent was also associated with the Congress companymittee.
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Civil Appeal No.
Exhibit R 1/8 dated 26 August, 1966 is a numberice for a meeting of the Congress Committee at Singoli.
The appellant challenged the levy of export duty of Rs.
The appellant on 26 July, 1966 filed shipping bill in triplicate before the Joint Chief Controller of Imports and Exports Panaji, Goa for the purpose of obtaining export licence in respect of 10,160 metric tonnes of iron ore.
98044 which was number levied in respect of the companysignment was due from the appellant and the appellant was called upon in accordance with section 28 of the Act as to why the amount should number be recover ed from the appellant.
The relevant item in the said schedule introduced by way amendment is 28 and the name of the article is lumpy iron ore and the rate of duty is Rs.
98044 on 9804 40 metric tonnes of iron ore shipped on S.S. Ardenode on 3 August, 1966 at the rate of Rs.
It is written by the respondent.
The Customs authorities therefore held that the appellant was liable to pay the export duty.
The abbreviation E.F. means Export Fee.
The appellant companytended before the Customs authorities that the shipping bill was presented to the Customs authorities and the entry outwards to the ship S.S. Ardenode was given prior to 2 August, 1966 when numberduty was payable in respect of the export of the goods in question.
On 1 August, 1966 the Customs authorities made these entries on the shipping bill rotation No.
The Customs authorities on 28 January, 1967 issued a numberice to the appellant numberifying that the goods actually shipped by the appellant were subject to export duty at the rate of Rs.
10 Per metric tonne and the custom duty amounting to Rs.
2137 of 1968.
10 per metric tonne.
On 30 July, 1966 M s. appeal to voters that voting for Congress would amount to a sin Reading the evidence in print one gets the impression that each witness came prepared to play the part assigned to him.
These endorsements were PI as usual and checked des Inspected the lot 2 barges checlkeci des and Pd in full.
The appellant impeached the order of the Customs authorities under Article 226 of the Constitution in the Court of the Judicial Commissioner, Goa, Daman and Diu, Panaji.
