2011 (3) TMI 1339 - HC - Customs

Demand - Provisional assessment - The case of the petitioner that, till October, 2010, the duty was being assessed, on the basis of the declared value which substantially got changed, thereafter - Held that - Taking note of the fact that the final assessment order had already been passed in W.A No.2048//2010 and connected cases, it was observed by the Division Bench that the concerned assessee had to pursue the statutory remedy, if he was aggrieved by the final assessment - respondents are directed to finalise the proceedings and pass final assessment orders, in respect of the pending bills of entries, after considering the entire materials on record forthwith - Decided in favor of the assessee by way of remand.

Summary

Issues:
Assessment of customs duty based on declared vs. actual value, finalization of provisional assessment, applicability of Tribunal's order on similar consignments.

Analysis:
The petitioner sought finalization of customs duty assessment following an order by the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal, Bangalore, related to bills of entries. The issue arose from the import of 'betel nuts' through Cochin Port. Initially, duty was assessed based on declared value, which later shifted to actual value, leading to a dispute. A writ petition was filed, resulting in a Division Bench judgment directing provisional assessment with specific conditions for release of goods.

One party appealed the assessment orders to the Tribunal, which set aside the assessment in favor of the assessee. The petitioner argued that the Department should follow the Tribunal's order for similar consignments. However, the respondents contended that each case must be assessed individually based on various factors like goods quality, origin, and import specifics, challenging the Tribunal's order validity.

The Division Bench's judgment provided clear directions for provisional assessment and subsequent statutory remedies for aggrieved parties. The petitioner was instructed to pursue statutory remedies through the Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal once the assessment was finalized. Consequently, the respondents were directed to conclude pending assessment orders promptly, considering all evidence and the Tribunal's order if relevant, within one week, with a requirement for a detailed written decision.

In conclusion, the judgment addressed the dispute over customs duty assessment, the importance of following Tribunal orders, and the necessity for individual case evaluations. It emphasized the need for proper assessment procedures, statutory remedies for aggrieved parties, and timely finalization of assessment orders based on all available evidence and legal provisions.