TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2017 (3) TMI 497
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
...., both dated 17th March, 2012. The bills of entry were filed for first check. On first check the proper officer of Customs classified the goods under Customs Tariff Heading 85131090. The appellant challenged such classification by writ petition which was disposed of by order dated 3rd December, 2015. Being aggrieved the writ petitioner is before us in appeal. The writ petition was dismissed, without calling for affidavits, on the reasons given in the impugned order as are reproduced below: "In the instant case, however, it is noticed that the petitioner's initial self-assessed bills of entry were verified by a proper officer and at the time of verification a query was raised by the proper officer to the petitioner "to please explain the ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... re-assessment within fifteen days from the date of re-assessment of the bills of entry. The mandate in subsection (5) of section 17 of the Customs Act, 1962 was not fulfilled and hence the re-assessment ought to have been set aside and quashed by the writ court. He submitted, the fact that his client had asked for first check was of no consequence. The bills of entry were self assessed as required by section 17 of the said Act. First check was possible under the provisions of section 18 of the said Act. The writ court had erred in holding that when his client had requested for first check it allowed the proper officer to re-classify the imported goods under the a different classification which did not amount to re-assessment. He referred ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....refused to exercise jurisdiction vested in him by law by not passing any speaking order in terms of sub-section(5) of section 17 of the Act and so long that order was not passed, no question of acceptance of the order of assessment arose." Mr. Roy, learned advocate appeared on behalf of Customs and submitted that the impugned order carried good reasons for dismissing the writ petition of the appellant and the same should not be interfered with. In view of the contention of the appellant that there is no significance of first check when bills of entry are filed and first check can only be resorted to under section 18, the question of law arose for consideration as to whether bills of entry filed for first check and the assessment made pur....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....uant to such classification made the appellant paid the duty applicable thereto and got released the goods. The appellant did not prefer an appeal against such assessment order within the time prescribed nor applied for refund of duty under section 27 of the Act. It was much later that the appellant filed the writ petition making out a case of violation of the mandatory provision of sub-section (5) of section 17 where no objection to that effect was taken in the material time. At the stage when the hearing was over, Mr. Roy, insisted and obtained direction to file affidavit. On 28th February, 2017 the Revenue filed an affidavit affirmed by the Deputy Commissioner of Customs, Port, Kolkata. The appellant declined to file affidavit-in-reply.....