1981 (9) TMI 108

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....m 15A (1) (ii) and charged to duty at 40% ad valorem with effect from June 18, 1977. 2. The petitioners filed with the Superintendent, I/C Range No. V, Thane, a classification list in respect of these two items claiming that the products should be covered by Tariff Item 68 as accepted by the Department prior to June 18, 1977. The Assistant Collector proceeded to charge the dutyon the basis of Tariff Item No. 15-A(1) (ii) in view of the Budgetary changes vice Finance Bill No. 2 of 1977 effective from June 18, 1977. The Assistant Collector felt that the revision of Tariff entry No. 15-A widens the definition of Synthetic Resin to cover all modified forms of Synthetic Resins. 3. The petitioners filed this petition in this Court on Januar....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....tter dated August 30, 1977, received from the Central Board of Excise and Customs, New Delhi. This letter was addressed to all Collectors and all Appellate and Deputy Collectors of Central Excise. By the said circular the officers were directed to classify the artificial synthetic resins and plastic materials, and paragraph 6 of the letter requires to be quoted to appreciate the grievance of the petitioners : "The position as indicated in this letter may be brought to the notice of all concerned so that the pending cases are decided accordingly without any delay. The lower formation should also be suitably advised to examine all past cases where the modified forms of resin were held to fall outside the purview of item 15-A (1) (ii) in te....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....de the matter on merits. The question is not whether the officer has got absolute discretion but whether the officer was impressed by the directive issued under the circular. From the proximity of the date of the circular and the order, it is probable that the officer was carried away by the directive contained in the circular. In these circumstances, it is not possible to uphold the impugned order. It has been repeatedly pointed out that the Assistant Collector is exercising quasi- judicial powers and he should not be guided in exercise of his jurisdiction by directives issued by his superiors or by any other extraneous considerations. 5. The Appellate authority has not bothered to take into consideration any of these aspects and has me....