Court Invalidates Glassware Import Finalization Order, Emphasizes Due Process

The court held the finalization order for glassware import from Indonesia as illegal and lacking jurisdiction due to the absence of a show-cause notice, contrary to the Customs Act. The court quashed the order under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, emphasizing the significance of due process in customs matters. The ruling favored the importer, with no costs imposed.

---

---

Issues:
Challenging an order of the Assistant Commissioner of Customs under Article 226 of the Constitution of India regarding the finalization of a Bill of Entry for glassware import from Indonesia, involving allegations of under valuation and discount impermissibility.

Analysis:
The petitioner, an importer with an Import Export Code, challenged an order finalizing a Bill of Entry for glassware import from Indonesia, which involved provisional assessment and clearance under a Bank Guarantee. The Directorate of Revenue Intelligence issued show-cause notices to various importers for under valuation, including the petitioner, but the charges were dropped by adjudicating authorities due to lack of evidence. The petitioner expected a show-cause notice but received a finalization order after 18 years, demanding a higher assessable value and additional customs duty.

The petitioner argued that the finalization order was illegal as it bypassed the requirement of issuing a show-cause notice under Section 28 of the Customs Act, 1962. The respondent contended that the petitioner could appeal the order but failed to address the absence of a show-cause notice. The court examined the original file, noting the completion of the provisional assessment process under Section 18, which required a show-cause notice before finalizing the duty. The court found no show-cause notice in the file, rendering the finalization order without legal sanction.

The court held the impugned order as illegal and lacking jurisdiction, allowing the petition and quashing the order to prevent manifest injustice. The court exercised its powers under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to set aside the order, emphasizing the importance of due process and legal requirements in customs matters. The ruling was in favor of the petitioner, with no costs imposed.

---