TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>Supreme Court Upholds Higher Duty Rate on Imported Brass Waste</h1> The Supreme Court upheld the Customs authorities' assessment of basic Customs duty on imported brass waste and scrap at 80% ad valorem under Exemption ... Waste and scrap - Precedents Issues:1. Interpretation of exemption notifications regarding Customs duty on brass waste and scrap.2. Application of Section Notes 3 and 4 of Section XV of the Customs Tariff Act, 1975.3. Contemporaneous understanding of the expressions 'copper waste and scrap' and 'brass scrap' in exemption notifications.4. Review application filed before the Supreme Court for reconsideration of the decision in Khandelwal's case.5. Liability of the petitioner to pay Customs duty on imported brass scrap at the rate of 80 per cent.Detailed Analysis:The petitioner, a Company importing waste and scrap of non-ferrous metals, challenged the Customs authorities' assessment of basic Customs duty on brass waste and scrap at 80% ad valorem instead of 40% ad valorem under Exemption Notification No. 97/77. The respondents argued that brass waste and scrap fall under Notification No. 156/77, attracting duty at 80% ad valorem. The Supreme Court in Khandelwal's case concluded that brass scrap is included in 'copper waste and scrap,' making Notification No. 156/77 applicable at 80% duty rate.The petitioner contended that the Supreme Court did not consider the distinction between brass and copper scrap in the exemption notifications. They argued against applying Section Notes 3 and 4 of the Customs Tariff Act for interpreting the exemption notifications, emphasizing the ordinary commercial meaning of terms like 'copper' and 'brass.' They highlighted that different notifications grant exemptions to brass or copper articles separately, suggesting distinct treatment based on market conditions and industry standards.The petitioner raised the issue of contemporaneous understanding, citing previous notifications that differentiated between 'copper scrap' and 'brass scrap.' They argued that the ordinary commercial parlance and industry standards treat brass and copper scrap as distinct items, supported by technical specifications and import policies. Despite these arguments, the Supreme Court's decision in Khandelwal's case upheld the application of Notification No. 156/77 for brass scrap, mandating the petitioner to pay duty at 80% ad valorem.The petitioner's request for a review of the Supreme Court's decision was acknowledged, but the Court upheld the duty liability under Notification No. 156/77. The judgment directed the petitioner to pay Customs duty on imported brass scrap in four monthly instalments, with provisions for default consequences and maintenance of a Bank Guarantee until full payment. No costs were awarded in the matter, concluding the disposal of the Rule.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
