Tariff duty reduction rights after sale allow the purchaser to claim the corresponding refund from the seller.

Section 10 of the Indian Tariff Act, 1894 was construed on its own language, without importing English enactments referring to delivery or clearance. The provision was read as adjusting the parties' rights even after the sale is complete: clause (a) allows the seller to recover any enhanced duty from the purchaser, and clause (b) correspondingly entitles the purchaser to the benefit of any reduction or remission of duty. The omission of the words "delivery" and "clearance" was treated as deliberate. On that construction, a purchaser who had paid the original price could recover the amount no longer payable, and the seller was bound to refund the duty benefit received from the Government.

---

---

Issues: Whether, on a proper construction of Section 10 of the Indian Tariff Act, 1894, a purchaser is entitled to the benefit of a reduction in salt duty after the sale so as to recover the corresponding refund from the seller.

Analysis: Section 10 was construed according to its own words, and not by importing the language of the English enactments referring to delivery or clearance. Clause (a) was read as showing that the section adjusts the rights of parties even after the transaction has been closed, since the seller may recover enhanced duty from the purchaser. On the same footing, Clause (b) was held to give the purchaser the benefit of any decrease or remission of duty, with the consequence that if the purchaser had already paid the original price, he could recover the amount that he was no longer liable to pay. The omission of the words delivery and clearance was treated as deliberate and significant. The agency finding of the lower appellate court was not accepted, but that did not affect the statutory result.

Conclusion: The purchaser was entitled to the benefit of the reduction in duty, and the defendants were bound to refund the amount received from the Government.

---