2017 (3) TMI 1397 - HC - Customs

Issuance of a direction that assessment proceedings be concluded - it is the petitioner s case that most of the documents have already been furnished and that, the bill of entries, however, are untraceable - Held that - the petitioner is aggrieved by the fact that, the assessment has not taken place resulting in an alert being put out against him in the EDI system - the prayer made by the petitioner for issuance of a direction that assessment proceedings be concluded, albeit, in accordance with law, appears to be reasonable - Respondent Nos.2 and 3 shall conclude the assessment proceedings as expeditiously as possible, after affording an opportunity of a personal hearing to the petitioner/authorised representative - petition allowed - decided in favor of petitioner.

Summary

Issues:
1. Direction to conduct final assessment
2. Lifting alert in EDI system

Analysis:
1. Direction to conduct final assessment:
The petitioner sought a writ of mandamus to direct the respondents to conduct a final assessment and remove the alert in the EDI system. The petitioner had imported Paper Machinery under the EPCG scheme from sellers in the Netherlands. The petitioner admitted that the machinery was not erected, leading to a notice from respondent No.3 in 2010. Despite submitting various documents, including an installation certificate and purchase agreements, the petitioner faced a show cause notice in 2011 due to missing bill of entry copies. Subsequently, in 2015, the petitioner was asked to produce additional documents. The petitioner contended that most documents were already submitted, except for the untraceable bill of entries. The court acknowledged the delay in assessment and directed respondent Nos.2 and 3 to conclude the assessment proceedings promptly, providing an opportunity for a personal hearing and issuing a speaking order within eight weeks.

2. Lifting alert in EDI system:
Although the petitioner initially requested the alert in the EDI system to be lifted, the petitioner's counsel did not press for this relief during the proceedings. Instead, the focus shifted to expediting the assessment process. The court, considering the circumstances, deemed it reasonable to direct the assessment proceedings to be completed within a specified time frame. Respondent Nos.2 and 3 were instructed to provide a written notice for a personal hearing, specify required documents, and furnish a speaking order to the petitioner. The court emphasized the need for expeditious resolution of the assessment, ensuring completion within eight weeks from the date of the court order.

In conclusion, the court disposed of the writ petition without costs, emphasizing the importance of concluding the assessment proceedings promptly while maintaining procedural fairness and transparency.