-renders transaction ‘not legally recognizable’

CITY firm, C.R. Jacob & Sons Ltd, had, on December 15, 1954 submitted to the  Comptroller of Customs and Excise an import entry for 999 cartons of malt amounting to $2, 430.36, while the malt was still on the high seas.
But by the time the ship arrived in port on December 17, 1954, a Bill dated December 17, 1954 was published in the Extraordinary Gazette, under the Provisional Collection of Taxes Ordinance, Chapter 41, whereby the duty on malt was increased.
The goods arrived in the Colony by ship on December 23, 1954. The ship had been expected to arrive on December 16, 1954.
The Comptroller claimed from the appellant company the difference in duty on the goods, under Section 251 of the 1952 Ordinance and the new provisions contained in the Bill.
It was contended for the appellant,  on appeal against the decision of the Magistrate who upheld the Comptroller’s claim that when the duty was paid  on December 16, 1954 in pursuance of the entry submitted on the previous day, the goods had been imported,  and on   December 16, 1954 , were entered for use within the Colony  within the meaning of that expression in Section 15 of the Customs Ordinance, Chapter 309, and were therefore liable to the payment  of such duties as may be due and payable under the  custom laws in force  at the time when the goods were entered.
It was held that under Section 15 of the Ordinance, goods are not imported until they are in the Colony.
As the goods, the subject matter of the claim, were not in the Colony when the duty was paid, the appellant was liable to pay duty at the rate existing at the time the goods arrived in the Colony, and not the duty in force at the time when they were on a ship, bound for the Colony.
This being the case, the Appeal was dismissed, with costs to the respondent.
Attorney-at-Law, F.R. Jacob, appeared for the appellant, while G.S. Gillette, Acting Assistant to the Attorney General, represented the respondent before the Appellate Court.
According to the Judgment of the Court, the appeal raised the question of the correct interpretation of Section 15 of the Customs Ordinance, Chapter 309.
The facts, which are not in dispute, are as follows:
(1) The appellant company submitted to the Comptroller of Customs an import entry on the 15th December, 1954,  for 999 cartons of Malt, representing 1534.32 gallons.
(2) The entry relating to this shipment was duly passed, and duty amounting to $2, 430.36 was paid on the 16th December, 1954.
(3) The assessment  of customs  duty  was made on 1534.32 gallons at $1.60 per gallon and this was at the preferential tariff  rate under item 112-03.1 of the then Customs  (Consolidation) Ordinance 1952 (No. 69).
(4)On Friday 17th December, 1954, a Bill was published  in an Extraordinary Gazette, under the Provisional Collection  of Taxes Ordinance, then Chapter 41, and the duty on malt  was increased thereby from $1.60 to $2.00 per gallon.
(5) This Bill was dated the 17th December, 1954.
(6) The M. V. Corona arrived in the Colony on the 23rd December, 1954, and the 1534.32 gallons of the malt, upon which duty was paid as aforesaid, was part of the cargo of the said ship.
(7) The S.S. Corona was expected to arrive on 16th December 1954.
On those agreed facts, the Comptroller claimed difference in duty under Section 251 of the Customs (Consolidation) Ordinance, 1952 (No. 69), now Section 251 of Chapter 309.
The claim was amended for $607.90.
Section 15 of the Customs Ordinance Chapter 309 is the one which provides for the payment of duty. It states:
“All goods  deposited  in any warehouse  without payment of duty on the first importation thereof,  or which may be imported or exported and shall not have been entered for use within the Colony  or  for exportation as the case  may be, shall be subject to such duties as may be due and payable on the like sort of goods  under the customs laws  in  the time when the same are entered, save in cases where special provision shall be made to the contrary.
“Provided that for the purposes  of this section,  in the case of passengers’ which, or of goods imported  into the Colony by post , for which entry is not required, the time of entry  shall be taken to be the time of delivery of such baggage or goods  to the passenger or addressee  as the case may be, and in the case of goods exported  from the  Colony by post, the time of entry of such goods shall be taken to be the time of posting.”
Mr. F. R. Jacob, counsel for the appellant, submitted that when the import entry relating to the shipment of goods was logged  at the customs on the 15th of December, 1954, and duty paid on the 16th of December, 1954,  there was compliance with Section 13, in that  the goods were  entered for use in the Colony.  
He contended that in relation to goods imported, the meaning of “entered” is defined in Section 2 and that it means:
“…the acceptance and signature by the proper officer of an entry, specification or shipping bill, and declaration signed  by the importer or exporter on the prescribed form in the prescribe manner, together with the payment to the proper officer by the importer or exporter  of all rents  and charges  due to the Government  in respect of the goods.”
He said that since the appellant company had paid their duty, it followed that the goods were entered; that the time for payment of duty had passed, and any subsequent increase of duty was ineffective, with regard to those goods.
According to the judgment, “Crown Counsel, Mr. Gillete, drew the Court’s attention to the whole of Section 15, and relied on the words ‘WHICH MAY BE IMPORTED’. He stressed  that importation of the goods should precede the entering  of the documents, and as the goods were not in the Colony when the duty was paid,  they were liable to the higher rate of duty on arrival.   
“As the goods, the subject mater of this claim, were not in the Colony (as defined in Section 2) when the duty was paid, the appellant was liable to pay duty at the rate existing   at the time  the goods arrived in the Colony and not the duty in force at the time when they were on a ship bound for the Colony.”