2018 (9) TMI 1454 - HC - Customs

Reassessment of Bills of Entry - mistake in the classification adopted at the time of assessment in the respective bills of entry - excess payment of duty to the extent of 2.5%. Held that - The time for filing an appeal against the assessment in the Bills of Entry would have expired and therefore the petitioners made an application for reassessment of the respective bills of entry for re-classification under Section 149 read with Section 154 of the Customs Act, 1962 - Section 154 of the Customs Act, 1962 deals with clerical error and allows correction of arithmetical mistakes in any decision or order passed by the Central Government, the Board or any officer of customs under this Act, or errors arising therein from any accidental slip or omission may, at any time, by corrected by the Central Government, the Board or such officer of customs or the successor in office of such officer, as the case may be. In Priya Blue Industries Ltd 2004 (9) TMI 105 - SUPREME COURT OF INDIA , power of assessesing officer to alter the assessment under Section 149 of the Customs Act,1962 was not brought to the notice of the Court. However, several decisions cited by the petitioners have allowed modification of assessment under Section 149 of the Act. The respondents shall give an opportunity to the petitioners to establish their case for re-classification of the imported wall fans on the strength of existing documents on the date of the import as per the proviso to Section 149 of the Customs Act, 1962 - If the classification proposed by the petitioners under subheading 8414 51 90 of the Customs Tariff Act, 1985 is applicable to imported wall fans, the respondents shall order refund of the excess duty. The 1st respondent or any other officer authorised under the Act is directed to pass a speaking order in respect of assessment made in the 23 and 9 bills of entries of the respective petitioner under Section 17 read with proviso to Sections 149 and 154 of the Customs Act, 1962 within a period of six month from the date of this order after giving adequate opportunity to the petitioners to establish the classification of imported wall fan under sub-heading 8414 51 90 following the principle of natural justice.

Summary

Issues:
1. Reassessment of Bills of Entry filed by petitioners under Customs Act, 1962.
2. Incorrect assessment of wall fans leading to excess payment of duty.
3. Refund claim not filed directly due to legal precedents.
4. Appeal dismissed on grounds of limitation.
5. Request for amendment of Bills of Entry under Sections 149 and 154 of Customs Act, 1962.
6. Judicial interpretation of Sections 149 and 154 for rectification of assessment errors.
7. Application of legal principles for refund of excess duty.
8. Direction to respondents for reassessment and refund.

Analysis:
1. The writ petitions sought to direct the respondents to reassess Bills of Entry filed by petitioners under Customs Act, 1962, as the consignments of wall fans were incorrectly assessed at 10% ad valorem instead of 7.5%. The petitioners claimed that the assessment error led to an excess payment of duty.
2. The petitioners could not file a refund claim directly due to legal precedents set by the Supreme Court, emphasizing that duty is payable as per the assessment order unless reviewed or modified through proper channels.
3. The appeals filed by petitioners were dismissed by the Appellate Commissioner on the grounds of limitation, as the statutory period for filing appeals had expired, leading to the rejection of the appeals.
4. Seeking relief, the petitioners requested for amendment of the Bills of Entry under Sections 149 and 154 of the Customs Act, 1962, to rectify the classification error in the assessment.
5. The High Court analyzed the provisions of Sections 149 and 154, allowing for amendment of documents and correction of errors in decisions or orders, respectively, by the proper officer or authorities.
6. Citing relevant legal precedents and decisions, the Court directed the respondents to consider amending the Bills of Entry, giving an opportunity to the petitioners to establish the correct classification of imported wall fans based on existing documents at the time of import.
7. The Court emphasized that any refund of excess duty would be subject to the petitioners satisfying the test of unjust enrichment, as per established legal principles and precedents.
8. Ultimately, the Court partly allowed the writ petitions, directing the respondents to pass a speaking order on the assessment of Bills of Entry within a specified period, and refund any excess duty after ensuring compliance with the principle of unjust enrichment.