Madras High Court
M/S.Erbis Engineering Co. Ltd vs The Commissioner Of Customs on 2 August, 2018
Author: T.S.Sivagnanam
Bench: T.S.Sivagnanam
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 02.08.2018
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE T.S.SIVAGNANAM
Writ Petition Nos.18142 and 18143 of 2018
&
W.M.P.Nos.21433 to 21436 of 2018
M/s.Erbis Engineering Co. Ltd.,
Represented by its Authorized Person
39, Second Main Road
R.A.Puram
Chennai- 600 028 .. Petitioner
in both petitions
-vs-
1. The Commissioner of Customs
ACC-Meenambakkam
Chennai- 600 027
2.The Assistant Commissioner of Customs (Group 5B)
ACC Meenambakkam
Chennai 600 027 ... Respondents
in both petitions
PRAYER in W.P.No.18142 of 2018: Writ Petitions filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for issuance of Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to call for the records of the case impugned assessment of Bill of Entry No.6954046 dated 26.06.2018 and to quash the same and consequently direct the respondents to assess the goods covered under the said Bills of Entry under Schedule II of IGST Notification No.1 of 2017 Integrated Tax (Rate) dated 28.06.2017 at the rate of 12% of IGST.
PRAYER in W.P.No.18143 of 2018: Writ Petitions filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for issuance of Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to call for the records of the case impugned assessment of Bill of Entry No.7052970 dated 03.07.2018 and to quash the same and consequently direct the respondents to assess the goods covered under the said Bills of Entry under Schedule II of IGST Notification No.1 of 2017 Integrated Tax (Rate) dated 28.06.2017 at the rate of 12% of IGST.
For Petitioner : Mr.Y.Ramesh
For Respondents : Mr.S.R.Sundar
Senior Panel Counsel
ORDER
Heard Mr.Y.Ramesh, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr.S.R.Sundar, learned Senior Panel Counsel appearing for the respondents.
2. The petitioner has filed these writ petitions challenging the assessment of the Bills of Entry filed by the petitioner under particular head and not under the head which the petitioner had proposed to classify the goods. Admittedly, this classification dispute cannot be adjudicated in a writ petition. Necessarily the petitioner has to work out his remedy in terms of the provisions of the Customs Act.
3. the written instruction given by the Assistant Commissioner of Customs (Group 5B), Chennai states that the Bills of Entry filed were assessed in respect of the items under the same classification as claimed by the importer, but imposing IGST under SI.No.453 of Schedule III of Notification No.01/2017.
4. In the light of the said position, the petitioner should be given an opportunity to contest such decision. Therefore, unless a speaking order is passed, the petitioner would not be in a position to contest the levy of IGST under SI.No.453.
5. Therefore, there will be a direction to the second respondent to issue a show-cause notice and afford an opportunity of personal hearing to the petitioner and pass a speaking order on merits and in accordance with law. Since goods which have been imported are high valued medical and diagnostic equipments, the second respondent is directed to issue show-cause within two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order and on the petitioner responding to the notice, adjudication can be completed as early as possible and in any event, within a period of four weeks from the date on which the petitioner submits their reply to the show-cause notice. The writ petitions are disposed of with the above drection. No costs. Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.
02.08.2018 gpa To
1. The Commissioner of Customs ACC-Meenambakkam Chennai- 600 027
2.The Assistant Commissioner of Customs (Group 5B) ACC Meenambakkam Chennai 600 027 T.S.SIVAGNANAM.J., gpa Writ Petition Nos.18142 and 18143 of 2018 02.08.2018