TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2004 (1) TMI 85
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....eel plates are to be assessed for Customs Duty at the rates prescribed under the Customs Tariff Act. The ascertainment of Customs Tariff is dependable upon the quantity, nature, character and material composition. By a purchase order dated 7th February, 1990 MMTC imported 30 pcs. of Hot Rolled Plates from its Belgium Exporter and shipped it to a vessel under Bill of Lading No. Z-02, dated 6th April, 1990. The petitioner company purchased said plates from MMTC on High Seas basis. The Customs Authorities realised Rs. 62,57,236/- on account of duty and Rs. 27,89,527/- on account of interest totalling to Rs. 90,46,763/-. The said amount by mistake was considered H.R. plates as alloy steel plates as per tariff manual without checking the declara....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....of the forum. It can only be determined by Court of law. Therefore, rejection of claim is justiciable as the authority cannot go beyond his competency under the Act. Such Appellate Authority relied upon two Supreme Court decisions and ultimately held that if the payment of duty is made under a mistake of law, the remedy does not lie with the departmental authorities but with the Civil Court. Accordingly, the appeal was rejected. 5.According to me, the appellate authority passed the order under undue haste. The original claim was rejected being time-barred. Therefore, unless the delay condoned there is no scope of the authority to go into the question of recovery of purported excess Customs duty. The appellate authority did not adjudge the....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....f I go by Section 23 of the Indian Contract Act, it says that the consideration or object of an agreement in law is lawful unless it is forbidden by law or is of such a nature, if permited, it would defeat the provisions of any law. In such of these cases, the consideration and object of an agreement is said to be unlawful. Even agreement of which the object or consideration is unlawful is void. In the legal battle, according to me, one has to proceed step by step to achieve the goal. Such steps are provided in the law. The law is to be truly interpreted to think about the sequence of a claim in between the parties. Question of nullity is a product of void principle whereas question of limitation is a product of voidable principle. A Court ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ut authority of law and jurisdiction. In 1988 (33) E.L.T. 249 (S.C.) (Salonah Tea Company Ltd. v. Superintendent of Taxes, Nowgong & Ors. Etc.) the Supreme Court held normally in a case where tax or money has been realised without the authority of law, the same should be refunded and in an application under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the Court has power to direct the refund unless there has been avoidable laches on the part of the petitioner. It is true that in some cases the period is fixed beyond which Court should not grant relief but that is not an inflexible rule. It was further held that normally speaking in a society governed by Rule of law taxes should be paid by citizens as soon as they are due in accordance with law....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
...."Unjust enrichment" is a mistake of law committed by the authority which has to be governed by the general law of limitation and cannot be governed by Section 27 of the Customs Act. He relied upon AIR 1999 SC 22 (Whirlpool Corporation v. Registrar of Trade Marks, Mumbai & Ors.) to establish that in case of any illegality there cannot be any bar for the writ Court to interfere in the matter and pass an appropriate order in connection thereto in spite of having alternative forum. Learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner before concluding the same contended before this Court that whenever it was detected by the petitioner that an excess amount has been recovered by the authority, the application has been made before it to consider the case....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....riate in the case of a Government instrumentality or one year. However, if the application, as made by the petitioner company even beyond the period of one year such principle may not be applicable. The authority concerned did not consider the same apparently as available in the record. Therefore, even the rejection as made by the authority and the appellate authority on that score cannot be said to be free from doubt leaving aside the part of applicability of general principles of Limitation. If I follow the procedure correctly in case of refund, the Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, has power to direct refund unless there has been avoidable laches and in doing so the Supreme Court has given a guideline not to follow th....