N.V.RAMANA, J. - (1.) These appeals, by special leave, have been filed against the impugned judgment and order dated 02.09.2011 in Writ Petition No.1761 of 2009 and order dated 24.11.2011 in Review Petition No.24 of 2011 in Writ Petition No.1761 of 2009 respectively, of the High Court of Judicature at Bombay, by which the High Court has dismissed the Writ Petition filed by the appellant herein and also dismissed the Review Petition by holding that no error apparent on record has been made out.
(2.) The facts leading to these appeals, in brief, are that the appellant imported eight consignments of goods falling under Tariff Sub -Heading 2208.10 of the Customs Tariff, namely, "Compound alcoholic preparations of a kind used for the manufacture of beverages" during the financial years 1993 -94 and 1994 -95. The customs authorities assessed the goods imported provisionally and subjected them to a prescribed rate of duty of Rs.300/ - per liter or 400% whichever is higher specified in respect of Sub -Heading 2208.10 of the Customs Tariff for 1993 -94 and 1994 -95. The appellant claims to have deposited the amount of duty provisionally assessed on the assessable value declared in the eight bills of entry. According to the appellant, he cleared the goods for home consumption during financial years 1993 -94 and 1994 -95. Between the years 1994 and 2001 the appellant addressed several communications, inter alia, to the Central Board of Excise and Customs and to the Tariff Research Unit (TRU) of the Union Ministry of Finance. The grievance of the appellant is that the rate which has been prescribed for goods falling under Tariff Sub -Heading 2208.10 is higher than that was authorized in the Budget Proposals during financial years 1993 -94 and 1994 -95. The appellant took recourse to the provisions of the Right to Information Act in order to procure relevant information from the concerned authorities. According to the appellant, the authorities have not furnished the relevant information.
(3.) Not satisfied with the attitude of the authorities, the appellant preferred a Writ Petition before the High Court seeking the following reliefs: (a) a writ of Mandamus directing the first and second respondents herein to issue a notification u/s.25(1) of the Customs Act, 1962 (for short 'the Act') in order to exempt goods falling under Tariff Sub -Heading 2208.10 so as to give effect to the Budget proposal announced by the Finance Minister (FM) in Parliament for financial years l993 -94 and 1994 -95; (b) a direction to the Chief Commissioner of Customs to finalize assessment of the eight bills of entry after a notification is issued by the first and second respondents u/s.25(1) of the Act; (c) a writ of Mandamus directing the second respondent to issue a notification u/s.25(2) of the Act for granting exemption from customs duty for goods falling under Tariff Sub -Heading 2208.10 for financial years 1993 -94 and 1994 -95; (d) an order for refund after assessments are finalized and (e) an order for the payment of interest at the rate of 12% p.a. on the refund that is ordered.;