High CourtsDivision Bench(2001) 12 BOM CK 0011

Voltas Limited vs Union of India (UOI)

Bombay High Court · Decided on 19 December 2001 · Citation: (2002) 140 ELT 375

HON’BLE JUDGES
V.C. Daga, J · J.P. Devadhar, J
RESULT
Allowed
CASE NUMBER
Writ Petition No. 1285 of 1988

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

6 paragraphs · 294 words

V.C. Daga, J.—The petition is directed against the action of the Respondent in detaining the consignment of produce known as ''polytetrafluoroethylene resin dispersion'' which is used for the purpose of importing non-stick property to utensils to prevent food and other materials from sticking to their surface. -

2.

The issue involved in the petition is whether this product is a plastic material or a paint. The contention is polytetrafluoroethylene is polymer and is, therefore, a plastic material and not a paint as contended by the Respondents.

3.

This controversy came to the shore with the import of above product under Bill of Entry No. 173/317, dated 21-1-1988 carrying GIF value in the sum of Rs. 15,578/-. This led to a show cause notice dated 18-3-1988 at the instance of the Respondents alleging breach of Government of India, Import Control Order No. 17/55, dated 7-12-1955 issued u/s 3 of the Imports and Exports (Control) Act, 1947.

4.

The petitioners invoked writ jurisdiction of this Court to take exception to the above show cause notice. Having heard the parties to the petition, there appears to be no dispute between the parties that in view of the clarification dated 24th June, 1985 issued by the Director General of Technical Development the import of polytetrafluoroethylene pigmented or non-pigmented is covered under OGL vide entry No. 23, Part 3 of List 8 of Appendix 6 of Import-Export Policy 1985-88, subject to the conditions laid down therein.

5.

In view of the above clarification, the show cause notice issued on 18th March, 1988 Exhibit-H (page 55) was unwarranted. The same is, therefore, liable quashed and set aside.

6.

In the result, petition is allowed. Rule is made absolute in terms of prayer clause (a) with no order as to costs.