2023 (11) TMI 773 - HC - Customs

Jurisdiction - Power of assessing authority u/s 28 of Customs Act to assess the IGST - Import of Wet Dates (Processed dates) - Claim of exemption from payment of IGST under the Notification No.02/2017-Integrated tax (Rate) dated 28.06.2017 - whether the order impugned in Exhibit P-1 is without jurisdiction and void ab initio? - HELD THAT - Sub-section (15) of Section 2 defines duty which means customs duty. Section 28 empowers the assessing authority to assess and recover the duties not levied, not paid, short levied or short paid or erroneously refunded. Section 28 therefore is not only in respect of duty which means customs duty but, it is in respect of duties which may be applicable on imported item/goods. Even otherwise, the assessment order is defined under Sub-section 2 of Section 2 of the Customs Act empowers the assessing authority to determine the dutiability of any goods and the amount of duty/tax, cess or any sum so payable under the Customs Act or Customs Tariff Act, 1975 (51 of 1975) or under any other law for the time being in force, with reference to exemption or concession of duty, tax, cess or any other sum, consequent upon any notification issued therefor under the said Act or under the Customs Tariff Act or under any other law for the time being in force. The petitioner has claimed exemption from payment of IGST under the Notification No.02/2017-Integrated tax (Rate) dated 28.06.2017. Therefore, the competent authority is empowered to make assessment regarding claim of exemption from the IGST under Section 28 of the Act. There are no substance in the writ petition. This writ petition appears to be wholly misconceived, and it is hereby dismissed.

Summary

Issues involved:
The judgment involves the classification of imported goods, assessment of duty, jurisdiction of the assessing authority, and the application of IGST exemption.

Classification of Imported Goods:
The petitioner imported items declared as 'Wet Dates' and classified them under CTH 0804 1020. A post-clearance audit revealed that the IGST exemption claimed was not applicable to 'wet dates' but to 'fresh dates'. The petitioner was issued a show cause notice for short levied duty, but failed to respond adequately despite multiple opportunities.

Jurisdiction of Assessing Authority:
The petitioner argued that the assessing authority under the Customs Act did not have the power to assess IGST, as it falls under the jurisdiction of the IGST Act. The petitioner contended that the impugned order was void ab initio due to being passed by an incompetent authority.

Application of IGST Exemption:
The petitioner claimed exemption from IGST under a specific notification. The assessing authority, however, found that the exemption was not applicable to the imported goods. The court determined that the competent authority was empowered to assess the claim of exemption from IGST under Section 28 of the Act.

Conclusion:
The court dismissed the writ petition, finding it to be misconceived. It stated that the assessing authority had the jurisdiction to assess duties applicable to imported goods, including IGST. The petitioner was advised to pursue the remedy of appeal, with the time spent on the writ petition considered for any delay in filing the appeal.