TMI Blog2010 (4) TMI 823X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ensing with the reasons in support of this order, by consent of parties, we set aside the order of assessment and remit the matter back to the assessing officer, petition is allowed. - Writ Petition No. 7260 of 2008, - - - Dated:- 8-4-2010 - V.C. Daga and K.K. Tated, JJ. Shri Prakash Shah, for the Petitioner. Shri P.S. Jetly, for the Respondent. [Judgment per : V.C. Daga, J.]. Perused petition. Heard. 2. This petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is directed against the order of assessment made on bills of entry dated 22nd August, 2008 and 4th September, 2008 and the standing order dated 13th August, 2 008 issued by the respondent No. 2 - The Commissioner of Customs (Import), Nhava Sheva, Di ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... The petitioners have been importing the furniture for the past 10 years into Nhava Sheva port as well as into Chennai. The price at which the furniture was imported by the petitioners in the past was accepted by the Customs Department based on the price negotiated by the landmark group at Dubai. The petitioners, under the bills of entry dated imported furniture. The assessment of the imported furniture has been done by respondent No. 3 not on the basis of the negotiated value but on the basis of value indicated in the Standing Order No. 36/2008 dated 13th August, 2008 issued by the respondent No. 2. According to the petitioners, the transaction of the imported goods is ignored by respondent No. 3 and the said standing order dated 13th Augu ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 157, the transaction value should be accepted provided the transaction in question is not hit by any of the circumstances provided in the proviso to Rule 3(2). According to Mr. Shah, the standing order has ignored Section 14 of the Customs Act and prescribed a method not to be found in Section 14 and rules framed thereunder. Hence standing order No. 36/2008 dated 13th August, 2008 being contrary to the provision of Section 14 of the Customs Act is liable to be struck down. He also submits that the said standing order is contrary to the law laid down by the Supreme Court in Eicher Tractors Ltd. v. Commissioner of Customs, 2000 (122) E.L.T. 321 (S.C.) followed in the case of Tolin Rubbers Pvt. Ltd. v. Commissioner of Customs, 2004 (163) E.L.T ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 8. Mr. Jetly, thus, reiterates that the instructions are issued for the purposes of uniformity in the matter of determination of actual valuation of the imported goods for levy of duty and to avoid discriminatory treatment to the importers of the same and similar goods imported in the similar condition by determining different valuations. He further submits that the assessing authority is a quasi-judicial authority and acts independently in exercise of its quasi-judicial powers. The guidelines framed are not mandatory but they are framed to prevent assessing officers from exercising their powers in an arbitrary manner. The idea is to channelize their discretion. He placed reliance on the judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of Varsha P ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s Act and Customs Valuation Rules. The said guidelines can only be used wherever the assessing officer finds that Customs Valuation Rules are silent or they need to be supplemented. The assessing officer is expected to bear in mind that wherever the standing order is running counter to the Customs Valuation Rules or mandate thereof or to the spirit of Section 14 of the Customs Act, the standing order cannot be put into operation. Mr. Shah s apprehension that once the standing orders are framed by the higher authorities, the sub-ordinate authorities are bound to consider the case of the assessee as per the standing orders or the guidelines incorporated therein cannot be without any foundation. But at the same time the assessing officer canno ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n cannot be fettered by self-created rules or policy. Although it is open to an authority to which discretion has been entrusted to lay down the norms or rules to regulate exercise of discretion it cannot, however, deny itself the discretion which the statute requires it to exercise in individual cases. The concerned authority of the Corporation therefore, notwithstanding the said circulars are required to consider the cases of retrenched drivers for alternative jobs. 12. The aforesaid observations made it clear beyond doubt that the standing orders which are formulated by respondent No. 2 cannot fetter jurisdiction and vest power under the statute under Section 14 of the Customs Act and the Customs Valuation Rules framed thereunder. It ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
