9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2019 (7) TMI 1712 - HC - CustomsMaintainability of petition - Scope of SCN - the customs duty has not been prescribed in the order in original - HELD THAT - It appears that show cause notice was issued on 07.02.2018, which was adjudicated upon by the Commissioner of Customs and the order in original has been passed on 10.05.2019 whereby penalty has been imposed and the value of the goods has also been determined. The importer, Sh. Ashwini Kumar, imported the goods by M/s Fed Ex Express Transportation Special Chain Services India Pvt. Ltd., which filed Bill of Entry No.82510 dated 09.08.2017. Petition cannot be maintained mainly for the following reasons (a) The value of the goods narrated on more than one occasion in the order in original and the rate of duty is ad valorem. Hence the customs duty can be arrived at without going into any more details. (b) The order in original is an appealable order. Petition dismissed.
Issues:
Challenge to order in original by Commissioner of Customs regarding customs duty determination. Analysis: 1. The writ petition challenged the order in original issued by the Commissioner of Customs on the grounds of customs duty not being prescribed. The petitioner contended that the duty determination was not clearly stated in the order. 2. The Court noted that a show cause notice was issued in February 2018 and subsequently adjudicated upon by the Commissioner of Customs, leading to the order in original in May 2019. The order imposed penalties and determined the value of the imported goods, which were brought in by a specific importer through a transportation service. 3. Upon reviewing the order in original, the Court found no merit in entertaining the writ petition due to the following reasons: - The value of the goods and the ad valorem rate of duty were clearly mentioned in the order, making it possible to calculate the customs duty without further elaboration. - The order in original was deemed appealable, providing an alternative remedy for the petitioner. 4. Considering the availability of an appeal process as a more appropriate remedy, the Court dismissed the writ petition, stating that there was no valid reason to entertain it further. The judgment upheld the appealable nature of the order and the clarity provided in the determination of customs duty, thereby rejecting the challenge to the Commissioner's decision.
|
