Anil K. Narendran, J. - (1.) THE petitioner is a Company incorporated under the Companies Act, 1956 having its Registered Office at Mumbai and Administrative Office at Indore. The petitioner is engaged in the import of Edible Oil like RBD Palmolein, which is a refined, bleached and deodorized form of palm oil, through various Ports in India.
(2.) THE petitioner, in the course of its business, entered into Exts.P1 and P1(a) contracts dated 16.02.2001 and 30.05.2001 respectively with M/s. Aavanti Industries Private Limited, Singapore, for the import of RBD Palmolein (edible grade) in bulk. The foreign seller shipped the goods against various Bills of Lading during the period from 04.06.2001 to 14.07.2001 in vessels 'HOKUSHIN VOY. 13/01' and 'MTL SARAH V. 126'. According to the petitioner, 5755.482 MTs of subject consignment was loaded against those Bills of Lading in the vessel 'HOKUSHIN VOY. 13/01' against Ext.P1 contract, which arrived at Cochin Port and the Bills of Entry for 3155.428 MTs and 2600 MTs were submitted on 11.06.2001, in order to clear the goods for home consumption. Ex -Bond Bills of Entry Nos. 2880, 2915, 3167 and 3199 were submitted between 02.07.2001 and 23.07.2001, which were assessed and duty of Rs. 5,94,04,644/ - has been paid on 02.07.2001, 06.07.2001, 23.07.2001 and 24.07.2001. On payment of the duty for the declared value of the goods, as assessed by the proper officer, the petitioner released 4437.278 MTs of goods. The balance quantity to be removed from the bonded warehouse was 1318.150 MTs out of Ex -Bond Bills of Entry Nos. 2915, 3167 and 3199 dated 4.07.2001, 20.07.2001 and 23.07.2001, in respect of which duty has been paid on 06.07.2001, 23.07.2001 and 24.07.2001 respectively. In similar manner, a further quantity of 2540.346 MTs of subject consignment was loaded in the vessel 'MTL. SARAH V. 126' against Ext.P1(a) contract, on a negotiated/confirmed price of US$ 248 per MT, and the entire quantity was discharged in Cochin Port during the period from 02.06.2001 to 3rd week of July, 2001. Bill of Entry for the said consignment was submitted on 23.07.2001, in order to clear the goods for home consumption. Ex -Bond Bill of Entry No. 3407 dated 03.08.2001 was submitted on 03.08.2001, which was assessed and duty of Rs.2,77,60,341/ - was paid by cash on 04.08.2001. The warehousing of the subject consignment was in a private bonded warehouse at Wellingdon Island, Cochin. The bonds executed in terms of Section 59 of the Customs Act, 1962 in order to secure the revenue stood cancelled by operation of Section 73 of the Customs Act, once the duty has been rightly assessed, paid and accepted without any reservation by the Department on the basis of declared price. As against the quantity of 2600 MTs of the subject consignment, as has been discharged by the vessel 'HOKUSHIN VOY. 13/01', a quantity of 1281.850 MTs had already been actually removed prior to 03.08.2001 on payment of duty on the declared price, which has been accepted to be the correct value. However, the 2nd respondent refused to release the balance quantity of 1318.150 MTs covered by Ex -Bond Bills of Entry Nos. 2915, 3167 and 3199 dated 04.07.2001, 20.07.2001 and 23.07.2001 respectively, the duty in respect of which has already been paid and accepted on 06.07.2001, 23.07.2001 and 24.07.2001 respectively, on the premises of Ext.P6 notification No. dated 03.08.2001 of the 1st respondent, wherein the Central Government in exercise of powers vested in it under sub -section (2) of Section 14 of the Customs Act, fixed the tariff value per MT of Crude Palm Oil, RDB Palm Oil and RDB Palmolein at US$ 337, US$ 351 and US$ 372 respectively. In similar manner, the 2nd respondent refused to release 2540.346 MTs covered by Ex -Bond Bill of Entry No. 3407 dated 03.08.2001, the duty in respect of which has already been paid and accepted on 04.08.2001. According to the 2nd respondent, the duty for the left over subject consignment has to be assessed at the tariff rate of US$ 372 per MT, as against the declared price of US$ 234 per MT.
(3.) IT is mainly aggrieved by Ext.P6 notification the petitioner has approached this Court in this original petition, seeking a writ of certiorari to quash the said notification and seeking a declaration that the goods imported by the petitioner, in respect of which duty has been paid on 06.07.2001, 23.07.2001, 24.07.2001 and 04.08.2001 are entitled to be released without payment of any further duty pursuant to Ext.P6 notification. The petitioner has also sought for other consequential reliefs.;