2019 (12) TMI 1147 - HC - Customs

Time limitation to frame assessment - finalization of provisionally assessed Bills of Entry beyond a period of five years - Power of the Revenue to frame final assessment after the expiry of 5 years from the date of Bill of Entry - Section 18 of the Customs Act 1962 - Valuation of imported goods - zinc skimming - HELD THAT - This Court in case of M/S GUPTA SMELTER PRIVATE LIMITED VERSUS UNION OF INDIA AND ANOTHER 2018 (11) TMI 502 - PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT after noticing all the arguments of Respondents and relying upon judgment of this Court in the case of M/S GPI TEXTILES LIMITED VERSUS UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS 2018 (9) TMI 25 - PUNJAB HARYANA HIGH COURT has held that final assessment under Section 18 of Customs Act 1962 cannot be made after the expiry of five years from the date of bill of entry. Admittedly in the present case Bills of Entry were filed 7-8 years back from the date of impugned notice(s) and neither there was any petition of petitioners pending before Competent Court nor was any stay of any court thus there was no reason to withhold framing of final assessment. The Bills of Entry in question are having no concern with order passed by said order of Tribunal. Interestingly the respondent did not raise this plea while earlier matter of petitioner company was adjudicated on identical issue by this Court even though at that point of time also the position was same. The respondent-Department has taken this frivolous plea just to conceal their negligence/ incompetency and mislead this Court which cannot be appreciated. Hence the said plea is rejected. The impugned notices for framing final assessment of provisional assessment are hereby quashed - petition allowed.

Summary

Issues Involved:
- Quashing of Show Cause Notice(s) of finalization of provisionally assessed Bills of Entry beyond five years.
- Interpretation of Section 18 of the Customs Act, 1962 regarding the limitation period for final assessment.
- Application of previous judgments in similar cases to the present petitions.

Issue 1: Quashing of Show Cause Notice(s) of finalization of provisionally assessed Bills of Entry beyond five years:
The writ petitions involved importers seeking to quash Show Cause Notices for finalization of provisionally assessed Bills of Entry beyond a five-year period. The Petitioners, including private limited companies and partnership concerns, imported goods through Dry Port, Ludhiana. The Custom Authorities provisionally assessed the goods under Section 18 of the Customs Act, 1962, during the periods 2011-2013. The Respondent department issued Notices for final assessment beyond the five-year limit, which the Petitioners challenged in the present petitions.

Issue 2: Interpretation of Section 18 of the Customs Act, 1962 regarding the limitation period for final assessment:
The Court analyzed Section 18 of the Customs Act, 1962, which does not specify a limitation period for final assessment. The Petitioner's counsel argued that a Division Bench Judgment of the Court had previously held that final assessment cannot be made after five years from the date of the Bill of Entry. The Respondent's counsel contended that the final assessment was pending due to valuation issues and other reasons, and that no show cause notice under Section 28 of the Customs Act had been issued. However, the Court held that the Respondent's arguments were deflecting from their responsibility, and the plea based on a previous Tribunal order was rejected.

Issue 3: Application of previous judgments in similar cases to the present petitions:
The Court referred to a previous judgment involving Gupta Smelters Pvt. Ltd., where it was held that final assessment under Section 18 of the Customs Act cannot be made after five years from the Bill of Entry date. The Court found that the present cases were similar to the precedent and that the Respondent's attempts to delay final assessment were unjustified. The Court concluded that the issue was squarely covered by the previous judgment, and accordingly, all the petitions were allowed, quashing the impugned notices for final assessment of provisionally assessed Bills of Entry in all cases.

This detailed analysis of the judgment addresses the issues involved comprehensively, focusing on the interpretation of relevant legal provisions and the application of previous judgments to the present case.