9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (8) TMI 37X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . However, the department did not accept such declared value and enhanced the value to 900 USD/MT. For enhancement of such value, no speaking order was passed by the department as contemplated under sub-section (5) of Section 17 of the Customs Act, 1962. Subsequently, the appellant also imported part of the same goods imported earlier and filed the bill of entry on 23/03/2015 before the Customs Authorities for assessment. In respect of the said subsequent bill of entry, the declared value was rejected and the value was enhanced to 900 USD/MT, in terms of earlier bill of entry dated 23.12.2014. However, in respect of the bill of entry dated 23.03.2015, the department had passed speaking order in terms of sub-section (5) of Section 17 ibid. O ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Entry No. 7787561 dated 23.12.2014. Therefore it is not open to the Appellant to question the correctness of the reassessment subsequently by filing a claim for refund on the ground that assessing officer had committed an error in enhancing the value of goods. 9.4 It has also been observed by the Apex Court in the case of M/s Priya Blue Industries Ltd. vs Commissioner of Customs- 2004(172) ELT 145(SC) that once an Order of Assessment is passed the duty would be payable as per that order. Unless that order of assessment has been reviewed under Section 28 and/or modified in an Appeal that Order stands, and refund contrary to assessment order is not maintainable. To the same effect is Hon'ble Supreme Court decision in case of Flock (India) Pv ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the proper officer shall pass a speaking order on the re-assessment within the stipulated timeframe. It is an undisputed fact that in respect of enhancement of the declared value, the proper officer had not passed any speaking order in respect of the bill of entry dated 23.12.2014. Since the Customs statute specifically mandates for passing of a speaking order by proper officer, which admittedly has not been done in this case, I am of the view that before addressing the issue, whether refund claim is maintainable, the matter should go back to the original authority, in the interest of justice, for passing of a detailed speaking order, indicating the reason/ground for rejection of the declared value. 7. The ratio of the judgments relied up ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
