1991 (2) TMI 121 - HC - Customs

Customs Act Notification Effective Date: 18-2-1987. Petitioner not liable for duty due to submission before notification.

RAJ KUMAR KEDIA Versus COLLECTOR OF CUSTOMS

RAJ KUMAR KEDIA Versus COLLECTOR OF CUSTOMS - 1991 (55) E.L.T. 481 (Cal.) Issues:Determining the effective date of a Customs Act Notification.Analysis:The case involved the importation of pulses by the petitioner, subject to duty under a Customs Act Notification issued on 4-2-1987. The petitioner cleared the consignment after paying duty under protest. Subsequently, the petitioner sought a refund upon learning of other importers clearing the same goods without duty. The refund claim was rejected on 6-7-1987 without giving the petitioner an opportunity to be heard.The petitioner later discovered a judgment by the Madras High Court, stating that the Notification was printed on 16-2-1987 and made available to the public on 18-2-1987. The petitioner moved a writ petition on 17-2-1990, arguing that the Notification became effective only from 18-2-1987 onwards. The Madras High Court's decision was cited, emphasizing that the date of release of the publication is crucial for a notification to be effective.Referring to previous judgments, the court concurred that the effective date of the Notification was 18-2-1987 when the Official Gazette was first available to the public. As the Bill of Entry was submitted on 17-2-1987, the petitioner should not be liable for duty under a Notification effective from the next day. Consequently, the court allowed the writ application, making the Rule Nisi absolute without costs and ordering a stay of operation for one week from the date of the judgment.