DALVEER BHANDARI, J. ( 1 ) THE petitioners in this petition have prayed that they be permitted to clear the is on payment of Customs duty at the rate of 60% plus 20% auxiliary duty. ( 2 ) THE petitioners say that consignment of their goods namely 1000m. T. of Crude Palm Stearin purchased by them from M/s Ashan Co. (Singapore) Pvt. Ltd. in terms of the Contracts dated 22. 9. 1980 and referred to in paragraph 3 of the writ petition and copies whereof are annexed at Annexure I of the writ petition are goods falling under Heading 15. 14/17, Chapter 15, Section III of the first schedule to the Customs Tariff Act 1975 and are subject to the Customs Duty of 60% and Auxilliary Duty of 20% ad valorem. ( 3 ) ADMITTEDLY, before the goods arrived in India on 7. 9. 81, the petitioners filed writ petition before this court, with the prayer that the petitioners goods be clear on 60% duty plus auxiliary duty, instead of 125% auxiliary duty. On 9. 9. 1981, the Division Bench of this court passed the following order:- 9. 9. 81 "present:mr. S. S. Ray, Senior Advocate, with Mr. Rajiv Dutta for the petitioner. C. W. 2074/81 Rule D. B. To be heard along with Civil Writ No. 1961 of 1981. C. M. 3896/81 Notice for October 6,1981. In the mean while,interim relief interms of prayers a and b . Petitioner should also give a bond for the disputed duty before learance. Dasti. sd/- CHIEF JUSTICE September 6,1981 sd/- S. S. CHADHA,j. " ( 4 ) THE petitioners consequently cleared the goods in pursuance of the orders and directions of this court on payment of 60 per cent duty plus auxiliary duty instead of 125% duty plus auxiliary duty. ( 5 ) IT may be pertinent to mention that on 24. 9. 1981, a Notification was issued by the Government of India, and according to the said notification, from the date of issuance of the notification, duty on all sorts of palm stearin has been levied on 125%. The petitioners consignment was admittedly cleared on 7th October, 1981 much after the Notification came into force. 9. 1981, a Notification was issued by the Government of India, and according to the said notification, from the date of issuance of the notification, duty on all sorts of palm stearin has been levied on 125%. The petitioners consignment was admittedly cleared on 7th October, 1981 much after the Notification came into force. The notification is reproduced hereinunder:- ANNEXURE-J TO BE PUBLISHED IN PART II, SECTION 3 SUB-SECTION (i) OF THE GAZETTE OF INDIA EXTRAORDINARY DATED THE 24th SEPTEMBER, 1981/2asvina,1903 (SAKA) GOVERNMENT OF INDIA MINISTRY OF FINANCE (DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE) NEW DELHI, THE 24th SEPTEMBER, 1981 2 ASVINA, 1903 (SAKA) NOTIFICATION N0. 213-CUSTOMS GSR NO. In exercise of the powers conferred by sub-section (1) of Section 25 of the Customs Act, 1962 (52 of 1962) and in supersession of the notification of the Government of India in the Ministry of Finance (Department of Revenue) No. 177-Customs, dated the 26th July, 1981, the Central Government, being satisfied that it is necessary in the public interest so to do, hereby exempts the goods specified in column (2) of the Table hereto annexed and falling within Chapter 15 of the First Schedule to the Customs Tariff Act, 1975 (51 of 1975), when imported into India, from so much of that portion of the duty of customs leviable thereon which is specified in the said First Schedule as is in excess of the rate specified in the corresponding entry incolumn (3) ofthe said Table: Provided that nothing contained in this Notification shall affect any exemption, granted under any other notification of the Government of India for the time being in force, from the duty of customs specified in the said First Schedule in respect of any of the goods referred to in this notification. TABLE S. No. Description of goods Rate of Duty (1) (2) (3) 1. Tallow falling under sub-heading 40% ad No. 2 of Heading No. 15. 01 / 06 valorem 2. Fixed vegetable oils, fluid or 125% ad solid, crude, refined or purified, valorem but excluding rapeseed oil and soyabean oil. 3. Rapeseed oil and soyabean oil 45% ad valorem 4. All sorts of- (i)Palmolein 125% ad (ii) Palm Stearin valorem (iii) Olein (iv) Stearin 5. All goods other than those specified in S1. Nos. 1,2,3 and 4 above, and falling within chapter 15 of the First Schedule to the Customs 60% ad Tariff Act, 1975 (51 of 1975 ). 3. Rapeseed oil and soyabean oil 45% ad valorem 4. All sorts of- (i)Palmolein 125% ad (ii) Palm Stearin valorem (iii) Olein (iv) Stearin 5. All goods other than those specified in S1. Nos. 1,2,3 and 4 above, and falling within chapter 15 of the First Schedule to the Customs 60% ad Tariff Act, 1975 (51 of 1975 ). sd/- (J. SRIDHARAN) UNDER SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT OF INDIA F. No. S. 22/81-TRU (Cus) Note:- This notification has the effect of making the intention clearer with regard to levy of customs duty on vegetable oils and allied products covered by Chapter 15 ofthe First Schedule to the Customs Tariff Act, 1975. " ( 6 ) MR. Rajiv Dutta, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submitted that the respondents by the said notification could not increase the duty. He further submitted that since there is no specified description of the goods in the Notification, therefore, the petitioners are under no obligation to pay the duty at the rate of 125% ad valorem. ( 7 ) MR. Madan Lokur, learned counsel appearing for the Union of India submitted that the respondents were justified in increasing the rate of duty in the larger public interest and after the Notification came into force on 24th September, 1981, the petitioners are under obligation to pay the duty at the rate of 125%. It may be pertinent to mention that the goods were admittedly cleared after the Notification came into force. ( 8 ) MR. Dutta also submitted that goods entered the territorial waters of India before the notification came in force and they are under an obli-gation to pay duty which is leviable on that date when the goods entered the territorial waters. ( 9 ) MR. Madan Lokur, learned counsel for the Union of India submitted that this controversy stands fully concluded by a Division Bench Judgment of this court, Jain Shadh Vanaspati Limited Vs. Union of India and another, 1983 (2) I. L. R. Delhi, 327. The ratio of the said judgment is the date when the ship enters territorial waters of India is not important for fiscal purposes. According to the said judgment, duty has to be calculated when the goods are cleared. ( 10 ) WE have heard learned counsel for the parties. We do not find any merit in the submissions of Mr. Dutta and they are rejected. According to the said judgment, duty has to be calculated when the goods are cleared. ( 10 ) WE have heard learned counsel for the parties. We do not find any merit in the submissions of Mr. Dutta and they are rejected. We are clearly of the opinion that the petitioners are under an obligation to pay the duty as incorporated in the Notification after the same came into force i. e. on 24th September, 1981. The said Notification specifically mentions that on all sorts of palm stearin, the duty would be 125 percent ad valorem. ( 11 ) THE interim orders which the petitioners have obtained have adversely affected the interest of the respondent-Union of India. In order to do complete justice in the matter, in the larger public interest, the petitioners ought not to be permitted to p73 make profit at the cost of public revenue. According to the well-known principles of equity, justice and fair play, the petitioners must restore the advantage they had over the respondents-Union of India because of the stay they enjoyed, and consequently deprived the respondent-Union of India of their legitimate and lawful revenue during the period when stay operated against them. As has been laid down in a recent judgment, M/s Parekh Prints and others V. Union of India and others, 1991 (3)Delhi Lawyer 99 (DB),that in a commercial transaction, the bank rate is 17-1/2 per cent per annum. Accordingly, the respondents should also be entitled to interest at the rate of 17-1/2% per annum from the date duty became payable till payment. ( 12 ) THE writ petition filed by the petitioners being devoid of any merit is accordingly dismissed with costs which is assessed at Rs. 2,000. 00.