Parliamentary printing error and duty rate: court upheld 15% ad valorem excise duty on cranes despite correction challenge.

The ad valorem excise duty on cranes under sub-heading 8426 of Chapter 84 was 15%, because the authoritative English text of the Bill and the enacted Act matched the Hindi version and the corrected text passed to the Rajya Sabha. The 12% figure appearing in the printed English version introduced in the Lok Sabha was a printing mistake and did not alter the enacted rate. The omission to place the correction before the Speaker under Rule 95 was only a procedural irregularity, and Article 122 barred questioning parliamentary proceedings on that ground. The challenge failed, and the excise demand was sustained.

---

---

Issues: Whether the ad valorem duty on cranes under sub-heading 8426 of Chapter 84 of the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985 was 12% or 15%, and whether the correction made in the Bill after its passage by the Lok Sabha could invalidate the enacted rate.

Analysis: The authoritative English text of the Bill and the enacted Act showed the rate of duty as 15% ad valorem. The material on record established that the 12% figure in the printed English version introduced in the Lok Sabha was the result of a printing mistake, while the Hindi version and the corrected text as passed to the Rajya Sabha carried 15%. The omission to place the correction before the Speaker under Rule 95 was treated as a procedural irregularity only. In view of Article 122 of the Constitution of India, the validity of parliamentary proceedings could not be questioned on that ground, as there was no illegality in the legislative process.

Conclusion: The challenge to the duty rate failed, and the applicable rate was held to be 15% ad valorem. The demand confirmed by the excise authorities was sustained against the petitioner.

---