Sponsored
    Follow Us:

Case Law Details

Case Name : Central Board of Excise and Customs Vs GMR Hyderabad International Airport Limited (Telangana High Court)
Appeal Number : Writ Appeal No.1321 of 2012
Date of Judgement/Order : 27/03/2024
Related Assessment Year :
Become a Premium member to Download. If you are already a Premium member, Login here to access.
Sponsored

Central Board of Excise and Customs Vs GMR Hyderabad International Airport Limited (Telangana High Court)

The Telangana High Court ruled that the Cargo Handling Regulations of 2009, as per the Customs Act 1962, were ultra vires in the case of Central Board of Excise and Customs Vs. GMR Hyderabad International Airport Limited. The court found that the regulations lacked a legal basis to survive and deemed the levied cost recovery charges as unsustainable. This decision stemmed from a dispute regarding cost recovery charges between the years 2008 and 2013, relating to the operations at the Hyderabad International Airport. The court analyzed the relevant provisions of the Customs Act 1962, particularly Sections 141 and 157, and concluded that there was no express statutory provision authorizing the imposition of such charges. The court further emphasized that the recovery charges, essentially salaries payable to customs staff, constituted a tax without statutory backing, violating constitutional principles. The ruling dismissed the appeal and upheld the decision of the Single Judge, asserting that the 2009 Regulations were beyond the scope of the Customs Act.

FULL TEXT OF THE JUDGMENT/ORDER OF TELANGANA HIGH COURT

This intra court appeal is filed against the order dated 11.06.2012 passed by the learned Single Judge by which the learned Single Judge has allowed the writ petition preferred by respondent No.1 and has inter alia held that Regulation 5(2) of the Handling of Cargo in Customs Areas Regulations, 2009 has no legal substratum to survive and held that consequential levy made on respondent No.1 towards cost recovery charges is wholly unsustainable. The dispute in this appeal pertains to cost recovery charges between the years 2008 and 2013. In order to appreciate the challenge of the appellants to the impugned order, the relevant facts need mention which are stated infra.

2. In the year 1999, the Government of India (GoI), Airports Authority of India (AAI) and the erstwhile Government of Andhra Pradesh (GoAP) agreed to set up a new Greenfield International Airport at Hyderabad on Public Private Participation basis. On 26.06.2002, guidelines were issued vide Circular No.34/2002 by Central Board of Excise and Customs for appointment of Custodian of Sea Ports and Air Cargo Complexes. A tender was issued in which respondent No.1 (hereinafter referred as ‘the Company’) was declared as a preferred bidder and a Concession Agreement on 20.12.2004 was executed between the Ministry of Civil Aviation, GoI and the Hyderabad International Airport Limited for development, construction, operation and maintenance of Greenfield Airport at Shamshabad near Hyderabad.

Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.

Sponsored

Join Taxguru’s Network for Latest updates on Income Tax, GST, Company Law, Corporate Laws and other related subjects.

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Sponsored
Sponsored
Search Post by Date
July 2024
M T W T F S S
1234567
891011121314
15161718192021
22232425262728
293031