1991 PLP 90 (SCMR)

NAIMUDDIN, J.‑‑‑Petitioners seek leave to appeal from the judgment of the High Court, dated 20th September, 1989 delivered in Constitution Petition No.D‑851 of 1989 whereby the petition was dismissed in limine in the following circumstances. Petitioners imported moulding compound and they were charged custom duty at the rate of Rs.9 per K.G. Assistant Collector of Customs issued a notice dated 28‑6‑1987 under section 32(1) of the Customs Act, 1969 calling upon the petitioners to pay the differences of Customs Duty recovered and actually due. The reason for the notice was that after the presentation of the Finance Bill 1987‑88 a declaration was issued under the Provisional Collection of Taxes Act, 1931 enforcing the provision of the Finance Bill as to the fresh levies and increases in the rate of various duties and taxes. A perusal of the said Finance Bill shows that the rate of customs duty on the plastic moulding compound was reduced to Rs.9 per K.G. But this reduction was withdrawn by the Parliament at the time of passing the Finance Act. It may be mentioned that before introduction of the Bill the rate of duty was Rs.13 per K.G. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the demand for the short levied custom duty was illegal because after the publication of the declaration under Provisional Collection of Taxes Act, 1931, the petitioners were rightly charged custom duty at the reduced rate. It may be pertinent at this stage if the declaration contained in the Finance Bill is quoted here, which reads as follows:‑‑ "It is hereby declared in terms of section 3 of the Provisional Collection of Taxes Act, 1931 (XVI of 1931), that it is expedient in the public interest, that the provisions of clauses (3), (5), 8(5), 12 and 13 of this Bill shall have immediate effect under the said Act." It may also pertinent if section 3 of the Provisional Act is also quoted here, which reads as follows:‑‑ "

3. Where a Bill to be introduced in the Central Legislature on behalf of Government provides for the imposition or increase of a duty of customs or excise, the Central Government may cause to be inserted in the Bill a declaration that it is expedient in the public interest that any provision of the Bill relating to such imposition or increase shall have immediate effect under this Act." It will be seen from the provision of section 3(ibid) quoted above that the provision of section 3 was to have immediate effect on the provision of clauses (3), (5), 8(5), 12 and 13 of the Finance Bill so far as this provision related to imposition or increase in taxes and. duties. Since in the present case the duty was already imposed and it was proposed by the Finance Bill to be reduced, provision of declaration could not have immediate effect in respect thereof. It could have effect only when a duty is imposed or is increased. In the present case the duty was proposed to be decreased by the Finance Act from Rs.13 to Rs.9 per K.G. Therefore, it was applicable from 1st July, 1987. Therefore, we find no reason to interfere with judgment of the High Court. Thus, this petition has no merits and it is accordingly dismissed. H.B.T./R‑164/S Petition dismissed.