2016 (12) TMI 830 - HC - Customs

Correctness of circular - General Alert Circular No. 11 of 2013 (dated 30.09.2013) which was in turn based on Circular No. 21/2013-C1 dated 06.09.2013 - It is stated that the impugned circulars were preceded by a long standing classification of all varieties of seeds as vegetable seeds and spices having regard to their use. With the impugned General Alert Circulars, the CBEC had to depart from the earlier thinking which was reflected in the previous clarification dated 08.01.2002 by the Board itself to all customs authorities with regard to the proper classification of various kinds of seeds covered under Heading 09.04 of the Customs Tariff as opposed to Chapter 12 - inaction of the respondent in particular of the CBEC is leading to the considerable margin to the members of the association who have faced frequent harassment by way of furnishing bonds and in sometimes depositing differential duties on account of possible higher classification and consequently higher customs duty. Held that - the respondent CBEC is hereby directed to consider the representations dated 18.10.2013 and 31.07.2014 which are part of the record of this case and also give hearing to the representative of the petitioner s association after advance notice on the basis of submissions made and on the basis of the material furnished - petition disposed off.

Summary

Issues:
Inaction of the respondent, specifically the Central Board of Excise and Customs (CBEC), in deciding the representation regarding the correctness of General Alert Circular No. 11 of 2013 based on Circular No. 21/2013-C1 dated 06.09.2013.

Analysis:
The petitioner association, representing agriculturists and planters of spices, challenged the CBEC's failure to decide on the correctness of certain circulars affecting the classification of seeds and spices for customs duty purposes. The impugned circulars deviated from the earlier classification of seeds as "vegetable seeds" and spices. The petitioner alleged that this inaction by the CBEC caused difficulties for its members, leading to harassment and additional financial burdens due to higher customs duty. The Court directed the CBEC to consider the representations submitted by the petitioner and conduct a hearing with the association's representative. The CBEC was instructed to form an opinion and communicate the decision within 10 weeks, ensuring reasons for the order are provided. The order was to be communicated to the concerned party promptly.

This judgment highlights the importance of administrative bodies like the CBEC promptly addressing representations from stakeholders and ensuring a fair hearing before making decisions that impact customs duty classifications. The Court's directive for the CBEC to consider the representations and provide reasons for its decision within a specific timeframe emphasizes the need for transparency and accountability in regulatory processes. The ruling aims to protect the interests of the petitioner association's members and prevent undue financial burdens resulting from potential misclassifications by the CBEC. The disposal of the petition signifies a resolution to the dispute through judicial intervention, ensuring that the administrative body fulfills its obligations in a timely and fair manner.