Belated reassessment challenge under EPCG scheme fails where final assessment was never timely appealed and duty demand stands.

An importer under an EPCG licence sought redetermination of assessable value and reassessment of the bill of entry after more than five years, without having challenged the original assessment in time. Because the import had been cleared on final assessment, the request amounted to an indirect reopening of the assessment through recovery proceedings for breach of EPCG conditions. The EPCG Committee and the appellate mechanism within the scheme had already declined revision of value, and the directions relied on did not compel acceptance of the belated revaluation request. The collateral challenge was therefore not maintainable, and the duty demand arising from the EPCG conditions was sustained.

---

---

Issues: Whether the appellant could seek redetermination of the assessable value and reassessment of the bill of entry after several years so as to avoid the export obligation and duty demand under the EPCG scheme.

Analysis: The import was cleared under an EPCG licence against a specific concessional duty notification and the bill of entry was not provisionally assessed. The request for reassessment was made after more than five years, without any timely appeal against the original assessment. The EPCG Committee and the appellate channel within the scheme had already rejected the request to revise the assessable value. In these circumstances, the demand raised for breach of the EPCG conditions could not be defeated by a belated plea for revaluation, and the appellant could not indirectly reopen the assessment in proceedings arising from recovery of duty foregone. The authorities were justified in holding that the directions relied on by the appellant did not mandate acceptance of the revaluation request and that the case law on challenge to assessment barred such a collateral claim.

Conclusion: The request for redetermination of value and reassessment was not maintainable, and the duty demand under the EPCG conditions was sustained against the appellant.

---