ASSISTANT COLLECTOR OF CUSTOMS SPECIAL SECTION CALCUTTA Vs. UNITED INDIA MINERALS LTD
LAWS(CAL)-1975-6-8
HIGH COURT OF CALCUTTA
Decided on June 12,1975

ASSISTANT COLLECTOR OF CUSTOMS, SPECIAL SECTION, CALCUTTA Appellant
VERSUS
UNITED INDIA MINERALS LTD Respondents

JUDGEMENT

Sankar Prasad Mitra, CJ. - (1.) This is an appeal from a judgment of Sabyasachi Mukharji, J. delivered on January 20, 1971. In an application under Article 226 of the Constitution the petitioner. United India Minerals Ltd., which is the respondent in this appeal challenged a show-cause notice dated March 8, 1967 issued by the Assistant Collector of Customs, Special Section. Calcutta, the appellant No. 1 herein. The petitioner also challenged the proceedings under the said notice.
(2.) The United India Minerals Ltd. is a company which carries on business of nrning and exporting mica. In July and August. 1964, the company exported several cases of "No. 6 Black Spatted Loose Mica Splittings" of the 1st and 2nd qualities to Italy by S. S. "Malacca". The goods were exported under four separate shipping bills. On February 4, 1964 the Joint Chief Controller of Imports and Exports issued a Trade Notice whereby exports of some varities of Mica were prohibited and some varities were allowed to be exported subject to a minimum F.O.B. price per k. g. as specified in the Trade Notice. The export of Mica of varieties other than those specified in the Trade Notice could be exported without any restriction as to the minimum f.o.b. prices. "No. 6 Black Spotted Loose Mica Splittings" of the 1st and 2nd qualities were not specified in the Trade Notice. The same could be exported without any restriction as to the minimum f.o.b. price. The export of the several cases of "No. 6 Black Spotted Loose Mica Splittings" of the 1st and 2nd qualities were authorised by the Joint Chief Controller of Exports, Calcutta, by endorsements made on the respective shipping bills. At the instance of the Appraiser. Customs House. Calcutta, some of the oases of the goods selected at random were checked before permitting export. It was found that the goods so selected were in conformity with the declaration made in the shipping bills, namely, that they were 'No. 6 Black Spotted Loose Mica Splittings' of the 1st and 2nd qualities. And the appraiser made endorsements on the shipping bills testifying the above fact.
(3.) On 8-3-1967 the Company was served with a show-cause notice. By this notice the Company was asked to show-cause why penal action should not be taken against it under Section 114 (i) of the Customs Act, 1962. The notice has referred to various correspondence that passed between the company and the foreign buyers and thereafter, it is alleged that export of Mica from India was governed by the -provisions and/or conditions stipulated in the Trade Notice dated February 4, 1964. On reasonable belief that the documents useful for or relevant for the provisions of the Customs Act and goods liable to be confiscated were secreted therein, the office premises of the company and other connected places were searched by the Officers of the Customs House in October, 1964. In course of the search certain documents were seized. It was alleged in the show-cause notice that in order to circumvent or by-pass the provisions or stipulations contained in the Trade Notice of February 4, 1964 and in the Export Trade Control Restrictions, deliberate plans and arrangements were drawn up and implemented by the company in collaboration with Italian buyers whereby the goods covered by the statements contained in the show-cause notice were exported as a result being misdescribed and misdeclared as Black Spotted Mica Splittings. The goods were not Black Spotted Mica Splittings of the 1st and 2nd qualities, it is further alleged in the show-cause notice that the declaration was made to make it appear to the concerned authorities in India that the goods belonged to a variety for which no floor prices were applicable. In the premises, the goods in question were exported and declarations to the concerned authorities were made on the basis of prices lower than the floor prices applicable to the actual goods exported. It is alleged further in the show-cause notice that there had been no declaration of the full export value that was required to be paid; and Section 12 (1) of the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act, 1947 and the Notifications issued thereunder under Clause (3) of the Export Control Order, 1958 had been violated. The show-cause notice says that inasmuch as the Roods which had been exported were prohibited goods, they had been exported in violation of the law and as such under the provisions of Section 113 (d) read with Section 114 (i) of the Customs Act the goods were liable to be confiscated and the company was asked to show cause why penal action should not be taken against the petitioner.;


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.