Appeal No 179 of 1985
From the Judgment and Order dated 1312
1984 of the Bombay High Court in Appeal No 273 of 1979
WITH Civil Appeal No 4427 of 1985
From the Judgment and Order dated 1941985 of the Bombay 356 High Court in Special Civil Appln
Writ Petition No 186 of 1982
A Setalvad PH Parekh M Korde and Manohar for the Appellants in CA No 179 of 1985
Soli J Sorabjee A Vachher SK Mehta Bomi M Usgao car MK Dua and Uday U Lalit for the Appellants in CA No 4427 of 1985
MS Rao AS Rao CV Subba Rao and P Parmeshwaran for the Respondents
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by CHINNAPPA REDDY J
The principal questions raised in the two appeals are the same and we are therefore dispos ing of both the appeals by a common judgment
There are however some points of difference which we shall mention in the course of the narration of facts
In Civil Appeal No 179 of 1985 Chowgule  Co Private Limited are the appellants
They carry on the business of exporting iron ore to various countries from India
It appears that previously iron ore used to be brought to the Mormugao harbour from various mines in the territory of Goa by barges and unloaded in the harbour
Thereafter the ore would be loaded on board ocean going ore carriers
Alter nately they would be directly unloaded in stream into the ocean going ore carriers
On account of the shallow draught of the Mormugao harbour which prevented large ocean going ore carrying vessels from entering the harbour or from having iron ore loaded to full capacity on such vessels within the harbour considerable time was wasted in the loading process resulting in substantial increase of the cost of transporting iron ore from Mormugao
Therefore in about 1967 the appellant company conceived the idea of acquiring a transhipper  into which barges could unload iron ore and from which large quantities of iron ore could be loaded into large vessels in open anchorages
Such a transhipper would have to be specially fitted with special and adequate equipment to carry out those tasks
The opera tion of loading a vessel in open anchorage by the use of transhippers is described as topping up 
On July 26 1967 the appellant Company applied to the Government of India Ministry of Transport and Shipping for necessary permission for purchasing a second hand vessel of about 15000 DWT for use as a topping up vessel at Mormugao harbour for iron ore exports
 By their letter dated January 16 1968 the Gov ernment of India granted their permission subject to certain con 357 ditions regarding foreign exchange etc
Thereafter the appellant company acquired a second hand tanker called The Tropical Grace and had it converted at the Yokohoma Ship yard in Japan as a transhipper
A certificate of Condition in respect of the vessel was given by BUREAU VERITAS
Among the main characteristics of the vessel it was mentioned in the certificate The Vessel originally a T 2 Tanker was converted into an ore loading barge at Yokohoma by Nippon KK Asano Dockyard from April to September 1969 under the supervision of our society
 It was further certified as follows The vessel will be entered into the Marine Register Book of BUREAU VERITAS with the following class and notation mark 13 3 Ore Carrier Small Coasting Trade starting from September 1969 for a period of four years
The vessel will be mainly employed as an ore loading barge in the Harbour of Goa India with the possibility to extend her exploita tion in certain periods of year as a bulk carrier for small coasting trade
As a result of the aforesaid surveys for conversion and reclassification the undersigned believes that SS TROPICAL GRACE is at present time in a position to undertake the self propelled voyage from YOKOHOMA to GOA
 The vessel arrived in the harbour of Mormugao on or about October 15 1969
The Deputy Conservator Mormugao Goa Port Trust Mormugao harbour was informed on the same day about the arrival of the vessel and it was stated in the letter this is an old 72 Tanker converted and equipped to do the work of topping up of the bulk carriers after they are loaded at the mechanic plant to the permissible draught On October 20 1969 the petitioner company applied to the Government of India for the issue of General Licence  under s406 of the 
It was stated that the general licence was sought to ply the vessel for top ping purpose in stream at Mormugao harbour 
The name of the ship was also changed to Maratha Transhipper 
Licence was granted by the Government of India for use of the vessel for topping up purposes in stream at Mormugao Kandla Bombay and Madras for a period of five years
It appears that this licence was later amended and the purposes for which the licence was granted was treated as a for topping up purposes in stream at any Indian Port b for trading on coast and c for a period of five years from March 5 1970 to March 4 1975
 On 358 November 29 1969 the petitioner company informed the Assistant Collector of Customs Custom House Mormugao harbour about the acquisition of the vessel Maratha Tran shipper earlier Tropical Grace for the purpose of up topping large size bulk carrier in stream
It was stated that they would be operating the ship within the port limits and that she would serve as a sea barge
It was also stated that normally she would take cargo coming by barges with the help of her own equipment and storing in her own hatches to the extent of 15000 tonnes and thereafter she would go alongside bulk carriers and transfer the ore from her holds into the bulk carriers
This letter was followed by another letter dated November 29 1969 in which it was stated that SS Maratha Transhipper was registered as a home trade vessel and that it was capable of three types of opera tions a load herself in stream in river barges b up top another vessel by using the cargo from her own hatches c up top another vessel by using the cargo from barges which go alongside Maratha Transhipper
We may also add here that The Maratha Transhipper  possess es all the certificates prescribed by the and other Maritime Laws to enable her to ply the oceans
On December 31 1969 the Assistant Collector of Cus toms Mormugao asked the appellant company to file a Bill of Entry for stores on board the vessel Maratha Transhipper 
This was followed on February 6 1970 by another letter from the Assistant Collector asking the appellant company to file a Bill of Entry for clearance of the vessel Maratha Tran shipper  for home consumption immediately
The appellant company by their letter dated February 19 1970 requested the Assistant Collector to enlighten them as to the relevant provisions of the law under which they were required to fill in the Bill of Entry in respect of the vessel which they said the Customs Department was aware was an ocean going vessel
The Assistant Collector replieding The function of the vessel ss Maratha Transhipper  is in the nature of a sea barge operating within the port limits
Such operations are reserved to the vessels imported for home consumption
 The company was requested to file the Bill of Entry for home consumption immediately
Thereafter there was some corre spondence between the company and the Customs
On April 23 1970 the Assistant Collector of Customs issued a notice to the appellant company asking them to show cause why the Bill of Entry was not filed in respect of the vessel 359 SS Maratha Transhipper  which was imported by the company on October 15 1969 for the purpose of carrying out topping operations within the port limits
The company sent a reply to the notice
A personal hearing was also granted to the company
Thereafter on May 22 1970 the Assistant Collector made an order requiring the company to file a Bill of Entry for home consumption in respect of the vessel The Maratha Transhipper 
The order of the Assistant Collector was confirmed by the Appellate Collector on July 23 1970
The Orders of the Assistant Collector and the Appellate Collec tor were questioned in a writ petition filed in the High Court of Bombay
A learned single judge of the High Court allowed the writ petition but on an appeal under the Latter Patent a Division Bench of the High Court holding that a vessel was goods within the meaning of s46 of the  allowed the appeal and dismissed the writ petition
The company having obtained special leave of this court under article 136 of the Constitution the appeal is now before us
The facts in Civil Appeal No 4427 of 1985 are some what different
The vessel in question in this appeal Priyamva da was originally called Jagatswamini 
Jagatswamini was an ocean going merchant vessel engaged in foreign and coast al trade in India the United Kingdom the continent Japan North America South America and Australia
VS Dempo  Co Private Limited the appellant in Civil Appeal No 4427 of 1985 acquired the vessel from its previous owner Ms Dempo Streamship Limited
The appellant company obtained the permission of the Government to have it converted as a transhipper
The conversion was effected by Ms AG Weser at a West German Shipyard
The ship was fitted with added holds on both sides cranes conveyors and ship loading equipments designed for transfer operations
The vessel was surveyed by Germanischer Lloyd and German Maritime
Interna tional tonnage certificate Suez Canal Tonnage certificate cargo ship safety certificate cargo ship safety
equipment certificate international load lines certificate and clas sification certificate were all issued
The vessel arrived at Mormugao Port on September 26 1982
The Customs Authori ties demanded that a Bill of Entry should be filed
Thereaf ter thesame story followed as in the other case
The main submissions of Shri Atul Setalvad the learned counsel for the appellant in Civil Appeal No 179 of 1985 whose arguments were supplemented by Shri Soli Sorabjee learned counsel for the appellant in Civil Appeal No 4427 of 1985 were that the scheme of the show that a vessel was not goods  within the meaning of 360 s461 of the and therefore it was not neces sary to file a Bill of Entry that it was also the case of the Government of India that an ocean going vessel was not required to file a Bill of Entry and that the vessel in question was an ocean going vessel notwithstanding that its main purpose was topping up bulk carriers of Iron ore
It was submitted that the Division Bench of the High Court was wrong in refusing to go into the question whether or not the vessel was an ocean going vessel when that was the very basis of the orders of the Customs Authorities as well as the judgment of the learned single judge
On the other hand it was submitted by Shri SMadhusudan Rao learned counsel for the Union of India that the definition of the word goods  in the unambiguously included a vessel leaving no scope for any argument and that in any case the vessels in question in both the cases were principally transhippers used for topping up operations in Indian terri torial waters and could not claim to be classified as ocean going vessels
We may now refer to the relevant provisions of the 
Section 222 of the defines that unless the context otherwise requires goods includes a vessels air crafts and vehicles b stores c baggage d currency and negotiable instruments and e any other kind of movable property
Import is defined as meaning bringing into India from a place outside India
India is defined as including the territorial waters of India Imported goods are defined to mean any goods brought into India from a place outside India but not in cluding goods which have been cleared for home consumption
Importer is defined in relation to any goods at any time between their importation and the time when they are cleared for home consumption as including the owner or any person holding himself out to be the importer
Conveyance is defined to include a vessel an aircraft and a vehicle
Bill of Entry is defined to mean a Bill of Entry referred to in s46 
A Bill of Export is defined to mean a Bill of Export referred to in s50
 An Import Manifest or Import Report is defined to mean the manifest or report required to be delivered under s30
Stores are defined to mean goods for use in a vessel or aircraft and includes fuel and spare parts and other articles of equipment whether or not for immediate fitting
 Section 12 provides for the levy of duties of Customs on goods imported or exported from India
Section 15 provides that the rates of duty and tariff valuation shall be the rate and valuation in force 361 a in the case of goods entered for home consumption under section 46 on the date on which a bill of entry in respect of such goods is presented under that section b in the case of goods cleared from a ware house under section 68 on the date on which the goods are actually removed from the ware house c in the case of any other goods on the date of payment of duty Chapter VI of the is concerned with provi sions relating to conveyances carrying imported or export goods Chapter VII deals with clearance of imported goods and export goods Chapter VIII deals with goods in trans it and Chapter IX deals with ware housing
Section 29 to 43 occur in Chapter VI and sections 44 to 51 occur in Chap ter VII
Sections 45 to 49 are dealt with under the heading clearance of imported goods  while sections 50 to 51 occur under the heading of clearance of export goods 
Section 29 requires the person in charge of a vessel or an aircraft entering India from any place outside India not to cause or permit the vessel or aircraft to call or land a for the first time after arrival in India or b at any time while carrying passengers or cargo brought in that vessel or aircraft at any place other that a customs port or a cus toms airport as the case may be
Section 30 imposes a duty on a person in charge of the conveyance carrying imported goods to deliver to the proper officer within twenty four hours after arrival an import manifest in the case of a vessel or aircraft or an import report in the case of a vehicle in the prescribed form
Section 31 prohibits the master of a vessel from permitting the unloading of any imported goods until an order has been given by the proper officer granting entry inwards  to such vessel
An entry inwards  order is not to be given until an import manifest has been delivered or unless the proper officer is satisfied that there was sufficient cause for not delivering it
Section 39 prohibits the master of a vessel from permitting the loading of any export goods other than the baggage and mail bags until an order has been given by the proper officer granting entry outwards  to such vessel
Section 41 prescribes that an export manifest in the case of a vessel or an aircraft and an export report in the case of a vehicle should be filed by the person in charge of a conveyance before the departure of the conveyance from a customs sta tion
Section 42 prohibits the departure of a conveyance which has brought any imported goods or has loaded any export goods to depart from that customs station without a written 362 order of the proper officer
Section 41 provides that the provisions of sections 30 40 and 42 shall not apply to a vehicle which carries no goods other than the luggage of its occupants
Chapter VII as we said deals with clearance of imported goods and export goods
We are primarily concerned with s46 and we consider it necessary to extract the whole of the section
It is as follows 461
The importer of any goods other than goods intended for transit or transhipment shall make entry thereof by presenting to the proper officer a bill of entry for home con sumption or warehousing in the prescribed form Provided that if the importer makes and subscribes to a declaration before the proper officer to the effect that he is unable for want of full information to furnish all the particulars of the goods required under this sub section the proper officer may pending the production of such informa tion permit him previous to the entry there of a to examine the goods in the presence of an officer of customs or b to deposit the goods in a public warehouse appointed under s57 without warehousing the same
2 Save as otherwise permitted by the proper officers a bill of entry shall include all the goods mentioned in the bill of lading or other receipt given by the carrier to the consignor
3 A bill of entry under sub sec tion1 may be presented at any time after the delivery of the import manifest or import report as the case may be Provided that the Collector of Cus toms may in any special circumstances permit a bill of entry to be presented before the delivery of such report Provided further that a bill of entry may be presented even before the delivery of such manifest if the vessel by which the goods have been shipped for importation into India is expected to arrive within a week from the date of such presentation
4 The importer while presenting a bill of entry shall at the foot thereof make and subscribe to a declaration as to 363 the truth of the contents of such bill of entry and shall in support of such declara tion produce to the proper officer the in voice if any relating to the imported goods
5 If the proper officer is satis fied that the interests of revenue are not prejudicially affected and that there was no fradulent intention he may permit substitu tion of a bill of entry for home consumption for a bill of entry for warehousing or vice versa
 Section 47 deals with clearance of goods for home consump tion and section 49 with storage of imported goods in ware houses pending clearance
Section 50 requires the exporter of any goods to make an entry thereof by presenting to the proper office a Shipping bill in the case of goods to be exported in a vessel or aircraft and a bill of export in the case of goods to be exported by land
Section 53 makes provision for permitting goods to be transmitted without payment of duty if they are mentioned in the import manifest as for transmit in the same vessel or aircraft  Section 54 provides and prescribe the procedure for transhipment of goods without payment of duty
Chapter IX deals with Warehousing 
Section 57 provides for ware housing of dutiable goods without payment of duty
Section 68 provides for clearance of warehoused goods for home consumption on payment of duty
Section 69 provides for clearance of warehoused goods for exportation without pay ment of import duty if certain conditions are fulfilled
The only other important provision requiring to be noticed by us is Item No 761 of the First Schedule to the Indian Tariff Act which provides for the levy of 40 per cent ad valorem standard rate of duty on ships and other vessels for inland and harbour navigation including steamers launches boats and barges imported entire or in sections
 Along with this entry has to be read the exemption granted by GSR No 930 which is in the following terms In exercise of the powers conferred by sec23 of the  as in force in India and as applied to the State of Pondi cherry the Central Government hereby exempts ocean going vessles imported into India or the State of Pondichery other than vessels im ported to be broken up from the whole of the duty of customs leviable thereon provided that any such vessel if subsequently bro 364 ken up shall be chargeable with the duty which would be payable on her if she were imported to be broken up In regard to the levy of customs duty the scheme of the Act appears to be as follows Goods which are imported into India that is goods which are brought into India from a place outside India are on entry into India broadly classified into i goods entered for home consumption under sec461ii goods entered for ware housing also under sec461ii iii goods in transit and iv goods for transhipment
In the case of goods in transit and goods for transhipment duty is not required to be paid subject to fulfilling the conditions prescribed by secs53 54 55 and 56
In the case of these goods there is no need to present a Bill of Entry
Bill of Entry is necessary and has to be presented in the case of goods for home consumption or warehousing Goods entered for home consumption are required to be cleared on payment of duty
Warehoused goods may be cleared either for home consumption or exportation on pay ment of import duty or export duty as the case may be
Goods entered for home consumption are to be subjected to duty at a rate and tariff valuation as on the date of presentation of a Bill of Entry under sec46 and goods cleared from a warehouse are to be subjected to duty at a rate and tariff valuation as on the date of actual removal from the ware house
Other goods presumably goods not disclosed but discovered to be imported or which have otherwise escaped duty are to be subjected to duty at a rate and tariff valuation as on the date of payment of duty
Sec461 which we have extracted earlier requires the importer of any goods for home consumption or warehousing to present to the proper officer a bill of entry in the pre scribed form
The question which arises for consideration therefore is whether the vessels in the two cases before us are goods brought into India for home consumption Mixed up with this question is the question whether a transhipper is an ocean going vessel We will first consider the question whether a vessel is goods so as to attract sec461 of the 
By definition a vessel aircraft or vehicle is included among goods vide sec222
But according to Shri Setalvad notwithstanding the definition the scheme of Chapters VI and VII of the and the context in which the expression goods  is used in sec46 of the Act require the expression to be interpreted for the purpose of sec461 as excluding a vessel aircraft or vehicle
In answer to a direct question by us Shri Setalvad confessed that if a vessel aircraft and vehicle are required to be excluded from the meaning of the expression goods  in sec461 of the Act he was unable to suggest what other purpose was 365 to be served by the inclusive definition of the expression which expressly brought within its shadow vessel aircraft and vehicle 
He frankly stated that he was unable to point out any provision in the Act into which the inclusive defi nition could be read
We cannot attribute redundance to the legislature particularly in the case of a definition in a taxing statute
We must proceed on the basis that such a definition is designed to achieve a result
Under sec
12 of the what are dutiable are goods imported into or exported from India and if goods are defined to include vessels aircrafts and vehicles we must take it that the object of the inclusive definition was to bring within the net of taxation vessels aircrafts and vehicles which are imported into India
It is  undisputed and indeed it is indisputable that sec461 is a prelude to the levy of duty or a first step in that direction
It must therefore follow as a necessary sequitur that vessels aircrafts and vehicles are goods for the purpose of sec461
Any other interpretation may lead to most anomalous results
Under sec
15 of the  the rate of duty and tariff valuation in the case of goods entered for home consumption under sec46 shall be as on the date when the bill of entry is presented in the case of goods cleared from a warehouse under sec68 as on the date on which the goods are actually removed from the warehouse and in the case of any other goods as on the date of payment of duty
Goods which are entered for home consumption under sec46 and goods which are warehoused are naturally goods which are openly imported into India without concealment
The expression other goods  mentioned in sec
15c is obviously meant to cover other imported goods such as goods imported clandestinely and goods which have otherwise escaped duty
Now if a motorcar is brought by road into India from a place outside India for the purpose of being used in India what is to be done with it and what is the point of time with reference to which it is to be subjected to the levy of customs duty Surely it is not meant to be subjected to duty as on the date of payment of duty as provided by sec
151c ranking with goods not disclosed but discovered to be imported
It would be unreasonable to subject the car to the levy of duty as on the date of payment of duty instead of on the date prescribed by sec151a of the Act that is the date on which a bill of entry is presented under sec46 as in the case of all other goods entered for home consumption
Shri Setalvad s submission was based on what he described as the scheme of Chapters VI and VII of the Act
The circumstance that in the several provisions contained in Chapter VI the reference to goods  is to goods which are carried and not the carriers themselves is not very materi al since the chapter itself deals 366 with conveyances carrying imported or exported goods  and not to goods which are themselves conveyances that is which are either vessels aircrafts or vehicles
Going to Chapter VII Shri Setalvad particularly drew our attention to Sec462 which speaks of including in a Bill of Entry the goods mentioned in the bill of lading or other receipts given by the carrier to the consignor and to the unloading of goods referred to in sec45 and 48 and argued that the reference to goods  here could only be to goods carried and not to the carriers themselves as in Chapter VI
We do not think that we can accept this contention
It may be that in sec462 and elsewhere the word goods  is used in such a way as not to include and as contradistinguished from the conveyances in which the goods are carried depending upon the context
But that does not mean that despite the defini tion the word is never to be understood as defined and that it should always be interpreted as never to include vessels aircrafts and vehicles even when there is nothing in the context justifying their exclusion
We can see no justifica tion for holding that a vessel is not goods  for the pur pose of sec461
The further question is whether the vessels which have been converted into transhippers to be used in Indian terri torial waters for topping up bulk carriers can be said to be vessels for home consumption merely on that account even though when they entered Indian territorial waters they came under their own power as ocean going vessels and notwith standing that they are still capable of being used as ocean going vessels and are in fact so used during the off season when it is not practicable to do topping up operations and for that matter even during the fair season when they have necessarily to go into the open sea to go alongside the bulk carriers in open anchorages
In both the cases before us there can be no doubt that the vessels are not only capable of being used but are used as cargo ships to carry cargo from one Indian port to another or some times to foreign ports necessarily going out on the high seas
They are structural and technically competent to go on the high seas and they have been certified to be so competent by appropri ate maritime authorities
Instead of remaining idle and getting rusty during off season that is when because of inclement monsoon weather topping up operations cannot be done in Mormugao harbour the vessels do go out into the open sea sometimes from one Indian port to another and at other times to foreign ports
Of course even in the course of topping up operations during the fair season it is necessary for the transhiphers to go into the open sea to reach the bulk carriers
But in our view these operations do not make these vessels ocean going vessels when their primary purpose and the purpose for 367 which they were permitted to be purchased and brought to Indian waters the primary purpose for which they were licensed and the primary purpose for which they are used is to conduct topping up operations in Indian territorial waters and not to serve as ocean going vessels
In the very application that Chowgule and Co Pvt Ltd made to the Government of India for purchasing the vessel it was stated that they wanted to purchase the vessel for use as a topping up vessel at Mormugao harbour for iron ore
The permission granted was also for that purpose
The certificate of condi tion issued by Bureau Veritas showed that the vessel was to be mainly employed as an ore loading barge in the harbour of Goa with the possibility of extending her exploitation in certain periods of the year as bulk carrier for small coast ing trade  Similarly in the case of the other vessel also the application of Ms VS Dempos Company Pvt Ltd was for the purpose of the vessel Jagat Swamini for use as a transhipper
The Government of India also granted its per mission for the conversion of Jagat Swamini for use as a transhipper at Mormugao port
It is clear from the material placed before us that both the vessels the Maratha tran shipper and Priyamavadha were originally ocean going ves sels that they were converted as transhippers for the purpose of topping up iron ore at Mormugao harbour and that they traversed the open sea from Yokohoma in Japan and Bremen in Germany respectively to reach Mormugao
At the time they entered the territorial waters at Mormugao it was distinctly understood and intended that the vessels were to be primarily used for topping up operations at Mormugao
If ocean journeys were to be undertaken either they were inci dental to the primary purpose of topping up bulk carriers at Mormugao or they were occasionally undertaken when topping up operations were not possible at Mormugao during the inclement monsoon season
This much is indisputable that though the vessels came on the high seas to reach Mormugao harbour they were brought to India primarily for the pur pose of topping up operations at Mormugao
In our view for the purpose of the levy of Customs Duty in order to determine whether any imported goods are goods for home consumption  we have to find out the primary intended use of goods when the goods are brought into Indian Territorial waters
If the goods are intended to be primari ly used in India they are goods for home consumption not withstanding that they may also be used for the same or other purposes outside India
We guard ourselves against saying that the converse may be true
The question whether goods not intended to be primarily used in India but used occasionally for short periods in India also fail within the meaning of the expression goods 368 for home consumption  has not been examined by us
We have only considered the question whether goods brought into India for use primarily in India are goods for home consump tion notwithstanding that they are occasionally or inciden tally used outside India
We are of the view that they are
The vessels in these two cases were brought into India to be used primarily as Transhippers at Mormugao though used incidentally or occasionally to go into the open sea
They are therefore goods for home consumption  and not ocean going vessels for the purposes of the 
After their conversion they were no longer ocean going vessels in the full sense of the term that is in the sense that their predominant purpose was use as ships traversing the open seas
It was therefore necessary to present Bills of Entry in respect of both the vessels
The learned counsel for the appellants argued that it has been the consistent practice of the Customs Authorities not to insist on Bills of Entry in the case of ocean going vessels
They quoted the statement to that effect from the counter affidavit filed in Civil Appeal No 4427 of 1985 and cited the example of a number of ocean going vessels which had not been required to present Bills of Entry
It may be that in the case of ocean going vessels that is vessels which are primarily used for traversing the open seas the Customs Authorities have not been insisting on Bills of Entry being presented
It may be that the vessels mentioned by the Appellants as having been permitted to enter into Indian Territorial waters without Bills of Entry are not primarily intended to be used in India and that they do answer the description of ocean going vessels
We do not have precise information about those vessels to conclude that the character of those vessels was the same as the Transhippers with which we are concerned
In the result both the appeals are dismissed with the costs
APJ Appeals dismissed


Summary:
The appellants in Civil Appeal No 179 of 1985 carry on business of exporting iron ore to various countries
Previ ously iron ore used to be brought to the harbour from var ious mines by barges and unloaded in the harbour
Thereaf ter the iron ore could be loaded on board ocean going ore carriers
Alternately they could be directly unloaded in stream into the ocean going ore carriers
Shallow draught of the harbour prevented large ocean going ore carrying vessels from entering the harbour or from having iron ore loaded to full capacity on such vessels within the harbour and consid erable time was wasted in the loading process resulting in substantial increase of the transporting cost
The appellant Company therefore conceived the idea of acquiring a Transhipper into which barges could unload iron are and from which large quantities thereof could be loaded into large vessels in open anchorages a process described as topping up
The appellant Company after obtaining neces sary permission from the Government of India for purchasing a second hand vessel for use as a topping up vessel at Mormngao harbour for iron ore exports acquired a second hand tanker had it converted as a transhipper and obtained  A certificate of Condition
 On the arrival of the vessel in the harbour the Deputy Conservator of the harbour was informed that this is an old 72 Tanker converted and equipped to do the work of topping up of the bulk carriers after they are loaded at the mechanic plant to the permissi ble draught The appellant Company then applied to the Government of India for the issue of General Licence under s406 of the stating that the general licence was sought to ply the vessel for topping purposes in stream at Mormugao harbour 
Licence was granted by the Government of India a for topping up purposes in stream at any Indian port b 352 for trading on coast and c for a period of 5 years from March 5 1970 to March 4 1975
The appellant Company also informed the Assistant Collector of Customs about the acqui sition of the vessel Maratha Transhipper  for the purpose of uptopping large size bulk carrier in stream stating that they would be operating the ship within the port limits that she would serve as a sea barge that normally she would take cargo coming by barges with the help of her own equip ment and storing in her own hatches and thereafter she would go along side bulk carriers and transfer the ore from her holds into the bulk carriers
Subsequently it was also informed that transhipper was registered as a home trade vessel and it was capable of three types of operations namely a load herseft in stream in river barges b up top another vessel by using the cargo from her own hatches and c up top another vessel by using the cargo from barges which go along side Maratha Transhipper
Thus the Maratha Transhipper possessed all the certificates prescribed by the and other Maritime Laws to enable her to ply the oceans
The Assistant Collector of Customs asked the appellant Company to file a Bill of Entry for stores on board the vessel and for dearance of the vessel for home consumption
On query being made by the appellant Company as to under what provisions of the law they were required to file the Bill of Entry the Assistant Collector replied stating the function of the vessel SS Maratha Transhipper  is in the nature of sea barge operating within the port limits
Such operations are reserved to the yessics imported for home consumption The Assistant Collector of Customs issued a mice to the appellant Company to show cause why the Bill of Entry was not filed
After the reply to the notice was sent and a personal hearing was granted to the Company the Assistant Collector made an order requiring the company to file a Bill of Entry for home consumption
This order was confirmed by the Appellate Collector
The orders of the Assistant Collector and the Appellate Collector were ques tioned in a writ petition
A Single Judge allowed the peti tion but on appeal a Division Bench set aside the order of the Single Judge and dismissed the petition holding that a vessel was goods  within the meaning of s46 of the Customs Act
The vessel in CA No 4427 of 1985 was an ocean going merchant vessel engaged in foreign and coastal trade in India and various foreign countries
The appellant acquired the vessel from the previous owner and obtained the permis sion of the Government to have it converted as a Tranship per
After the vessel arrived at Mormugao Port the Customs Authorities demanded that a Bill of Entry should be filed
Thereafter the 353 same story followed as in the other case
In the appeal to this Court on behalf of the appellant it was contended 1 that the scheme of the Customs Act show that a vessel was not goods  within the meaning of s461 of the Act and therefore it was not necessary to file a Bill of Entry 2 that it was also the case of the Government of India that an ocean going vessel was not required to file a Bill of Entry and that the vessels in question were ocean going vessels notwithstanding that their main purpose was topping up bulk carriers 3 that the Division Bench was wrong in refusing to go into the question whether or not the vessels were ocean going vessels when that was the very basis of the orders of the Customs Author ities as well as the judgment of the Single Judge and 4 that notwithstanding the definition the scheme of Chapters VI and VII of the Customs Act and the context in which the expression goods  is used in s46 of the Act require the expression to be interpreted for the purpose of s461 as excluding the vessel aircrafts or vehicles
On behalf of the respondent Union it was contended that the definition of the word goods  in the Customs Act unam biguously included a vessel and that in any case the ves sels in question in both the cases were Transhippers used for topping up operations in Indian territorial waters and could not claim to be classified as ocean going vessels
Dismissing the appeals HELD 1
Section 461 of the require the importer of goods for home consumption or warehousing to present to the appropriate officer a Bill of Entry in the prescribed manner
The question is whether the vessels in the instant cases are goods brought into India for home consumption and whether a transhipper is an ocean going vessel By definition a vessel aircraft or vehicle is included among goods vide s222
364E G 2
If a vessel aircraft and vehicle are required to be excluded from the meaning of the expression goods  in s461 then what other purpose was to be served by the inclusive definition of the expression which expressly brought within its shadow vessel aircraft and vehicle 
There is no provision in the Act into which the inclusive definition could be read
The Court cannot attribute redun dance to the legislature particularly in the case of a definition in a taxing statute
The Court must proceed on the basis that such a definition is designed to achieve results
364H 365A B 354 3
Under s12 of the what are dutiable are goods imported into or exported from India and if goods are defined to include vessels aircrafts and vehicles it must be taken that the object of the inclusive definition was to bring within the net of taxation vessels aircrafts and vehicles which are imported into India
Section 461 is a prelude to the levy of duty or a rust step in that direc tion
It must therefore follow us a necessary sequitur that vessels aircrafts and vehicles are goods  for the purpose of s461
Any other interpretation may lead to most anomalous results
365B C 4
Under s15 of the Act the rate of duty and tariff valuation in the case of goods entered for home consumption under s46 shall be as on the date when the Bill of Entry is presented in the case of goods cleared from a warehouse under s68 as on the date on which the goods are actually removed from the warehouse and in the case of any other goods as on the date of payment of duty
365D E 5
Goods which are entered for home consumption under s46 and goods which are warehoused are naturally goods which are openly imported into India without concealment
The expression other goods  mentioned in s15c is obvi ously meant to cover other imported goods such us goods imported clandestinely and goods which have otherwise es caped duty
365E 6
It may be that in s462 and elsewhere the word goods  is used in such a way as not to include and as contradistinguished from the conveyances in which the goods are carried depending upon the context
But that does not mean that despite the definition the word is never to be understood as defined and that it should always be inter preted as never to include vessels aircrafts and vehicles even when there is nothing in the context justifying from exclusion
Therefore there is no justification for holding that a vessel is not goods  for the purposes of s461
366B D 7
In both the instant cases undoubtedly the vessels are not only capable of being used but are used as cargo ships to carry cargo from one Indian port to another or sometimes to foreign ports necessarily going out on the high seas
They are structurally and technically competent to go on the high seas and they have been certified to be so competent by appropriate maritime authorities
When because of inclement monsoon weather topping up operations cannot be done the vessels do go out into the open sea sometimes from one Indian port to another and at other times to foreign ports
Even in the come of topping up operations during the fair season the transhippers go into the open sea to reach the bulk 355 carriers
But these operations do not make these vessels ocean going vessels when their primary purpose is to conduct topping up operations in Indian territorial waters
366F H 367A B 8
It is clear from the material placed before the Court that both the vessels were originally ocean going vessels that they were converted as transhippers for the purpose of topping up iron ore at Mormugao harbour and that they tra versed the open sea to reach Mormugao
At the time they entered the territorial waters at Mormugao it was distinctly understood and intended that the vessels were to be primari ly used for topping up operations at Mormugao
If ocean journeys were to be undertaken either they were incidental to the primary purpose of topping up bulk carriers at Mormu gao or they were occasionally undertaken when topping up operations were not possible during the inclement monsoon season
367D F 9
For the purpose of levy of Customs Duty in order to determine whether any imported goods are goods for home consumption  it has to he found out what the primary intend ed use of the goods was when the goods are brought to Indian territorial waters
If the goods are intended to be primari ly used in India they are goods for home consumption notwithstanding that they may also be used for the same or other purposes outside India
The vessels in these two cases were brought to India to be used primarily as tran shippers at Mormugao though used incidentally or occasion ally to go into the open sea
They are therefore goods for home consumption and not ocean going vessels for the purpose of 
After their conversion they were no longer ocean going vessels in the full sense of the term that is in the sense that their predominant purpose was use as ships traversing open seas
It was therefore necessary to present Bills of Entry in respect of both the vessels
367G H 368A C