TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2009 (1) TMI 292
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ntry was filed. On inspection the authorities of the customs alleged under valuation. The petitioners were called upon to take delivery of the goods after submitting requisite bond and bank guarantee. Hence, the petitioners filed the writ petition. On 19th May, 2000 the writ petition was disposed of with a direction to the authorities to release 50% of the goods keeping the balance 50% as security for duty that would be payable and they were also directed to submit a bank guarantee for a sum of Rs. 50,000/-. The authorities claimed that the duty payable for the goods was Rs. 5,00,000/- and accordingly in terms of the order 50% of the goods were released. The authorities passed an order against the petitioners. Being aggrieved, an appeal was....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....iew, so long as the price of the goods at the date the petitioners became entitled to get them back is not determined by appropriate forum, and thus, loss suffered by them is not assessed and determined, there is no scope to exercise writ powers for making an order directing the authorities of the customs to pay any particular amount to them. I think the parties should proceed on the basis of the value of the goods declared by the petitioners in the bill of entry concerned. According to the authorities of the customs that was an under valuation. So, if that value, what was the proper valuation according to the petitioners at the date of import, is taken into consideration for ascertaining whether for the balance 50% of the "goods the petiti....