- (1.) Avery India Limited is a Public Limited Company with its registered office at 28/2, Waterloo Street, Calcutta and one of its works is at plot No. 50-59, Sector 25-B, Ballabgarh, Haryana. The Annexure P. 31 passed by respondent No. 2 being illegal and also that the respondent No. 2 cannot charge octroi from the petitioner on the material imported by it by classifying the same to be instruments under Article 76 of the Faridabad Complex Administration, Faridabad Octroi Schedule. It is stated that the petitioner Company is engaged in the business of manufacturing and marketing weighing scales, weighing machines and weigh bridges of different kinds, capacities and sizes. In connection with this business the petitioner company purchases and brings raw-materials, components, machinery parts and other cast iron products into the municipal/territorial limits of the Faridabad Complex. After completion of the process of manufacture, the said machines are sent out from its works and sold throughout India from its various branches/sales offices/depots. The petitioner has appended some photographs of some of the components of machinery parts and cast iron products brought into the municipal limits of Faridabad, along with the petition.
(2.) It is further averred that the petitioner Company in connection with its business activities of manufacturing weighing scales, weighing machines and weigh bridges at its works at Faridabad had been bringing into the limits of the Faridabad Complex various raw materials, components of machinery parts and other cast iron products and had been paying octroi thereon under Article 100 of the aforesaid Schedule as 'machinery and parts of machinery' in connection with the weights thereof. Somewhere in 1986, according to the petitioner, the officers of respondents Nos. 2 and 3 started stopping the goods of the petitioner Company and insisted on charging octroi under Article 76 of Class VII of the said Schedule in accordance with the value of the item and not in accordance with the weight. According to the said officers parts of weighing machines would be treated as scientific instruments or apparatus. On October 27, 1986, Superintendent of the Faridabad Complex Administration imposed and charged octroi on the material being brought in by the petitioner Company under Article 76 of the Schedule instead of Article 100 and the petitioner Company preferred an appeal before respondent No. 2. Respondent No. 2 allowed the appeal of the petitioner vide his order dated March 13, 1987 and held that the goods being brought in by the petitioner Company within the territorial limits of Faridabad Complex were classifiable and subject to octroi under Article 145 according to weight and not according to the value of the goods inasmuch as the same was neither covered by Article 76 nor Article 100 of the Schedule.
(3.) The Administrater, Ballabgarh Zone on behalf of the Octroi Department requested the Chief Administrater-respondent No. 2 to review his order of 13.3.1987 and on the basis of the request of the Administrater of Ballabgarh Zone, respondent No. 2 issued a suo moto notice to the petitioner Company expressing his intention to review the said order. The petitioner Company submitted before respondent No. 2 that he had no powers of review conferred on him and he was not competent to review the order and there is no infirmity in the order dated March 13, 1987. The respondent No. 2, Chief Administrater did not agree with the submission of the petitioner Company and reviewed his order of March 13, 1987 on June 8, 1987 by setting aside the same and holding that parts and components of weighing machines and weigh bridges being brought in by the petitioner Company within the territorial limits of the Faridabad Complex were to be subject to octroi under Article 76. In arriving at this conclusion respondent No. 2 relied on a latter of November 4, 1980 issued by the State Government in this behalf.;