Summary
The Supreme Court held that Section 130A of the Customs Act did not require the High Court to call for a Tribunal statement of the case before deciding every reference application. The conditional wording of subsection (4) preserved discretion whether to direct a reference on the facts. The contrary decision in Commissioner of Customs, Bangalore v. Central Manufacturing Technology Institute was overruled.
Issues
- Whether the High Court was obliged to obtain a Tribunal statement of the case before deciding every application under Section 130A.
Provisions considered
- Section 130A(1) and (4), Customs Act, 1962The conditional reference mechanism did not impose a mandatory preliminary requirement to call for a statement in every case. (¶¶ 1, 2, 3)
Held
- The opening conditional word in subsection (4), read with subsection (1), gives the High Court discretion on each application whether to direct the Tribunal to refer the question of law. The provision does not first compel a statement of the case before that decision. (¶¶ 2, 3)
- Commissioner of Customs, Bangalore v. Central Manufacturing Technology Institute was incorrect insofar as it required that mandatory course and was overruled. (¶ 3)
Result
Referred question answered accordingly and appeals disposed of.