- (1.) Heard the learned counsels appearing for the parties concerned. It has been stated that the petitioner had imported two consignments of non-alloy steel slabs, under the Bills of Entry Nos. 692343, dated 1-10-2004 and 6951 93, dated 7-10-2004. The goods were supplied by M/s. Frovia, France, on the basis of a contract to supply two thousands metric tones of non-alloy steel slabs at Euro 280 (CIF), per metric tonne and sold on High Sea sale basis by M/s. State Trading Corporation, New Delhi. The petitioner sought for clearance of the goods, availing the benefits, as per the Customs Notification No. 21/2002, Sl. No. 190B, under the concessional rate of basic customs duty, at 5%. The goods covered under the first Bill of Entry No. 692343, dated 1-10-2004, had been cleared, availing the benefit of the said notification. However, in respect of the goods covered under the Bill of Entry No. 695193, dated 7-10-2004, clearance had not been made, as the goods had been subjected to examination and drawal of samples, at the instance of the Directorate of Revenue Intelligence, Chennai.
(2.) It had been further stated that the examination of the goods in question and the testing of the representative samples were carried out by the National Metallurgical Laboratory, Madras Centre. Based on the samples, it was opined that the goods were non-alloy steel/slab-seconds, vide report, dated 27-10-2004. The said report had been objected to by the petitioner, as to the accuracy of its conclusion. Therefore, the petitioner sought for drawal of fresh samples for the purpose of re-test, by a reputed International Agency. Since, the said request of the petitioner had been rejected, a writ petition had been filed before this Court, praying for a writ of Mandamus to direct the respondents, to permit the petitioner to draw samples, in respect of the goods covered under the Bill of Entry No. 695193, dated 7-10-2004, and the subsequent consignments covered under the Bills of Entry Nos. 702063 and 702064, dated 20-10-2004. By an order, dated 11-4-2005, made in W.P. Nos. 5700 to 5703 of 2005, this Court had issued a direction to the respondents in the said writ petition, to complete the assessment, within a period of seven days from the date of receipt of a copy of the said order, taking note of the fact that the Investigating Agency had completed the investigation and had issued a show cause notice, dated 31-3-2005. As the writ petitions had been dismissed, the petitioner had filed writ appeals, in W.A. Nos. 832 to 835 of 2005. The said writ appeals had been dismissed, by an order, dated 22-7-2005 [ (Mad.)]. Therefore, Special Leave Petitions, in S.L.P. Nos. 12359 to 12362 of 2005, had been filed before the Supreme Court.
(3.) The Supreme Court, while disposing of the Special Leave Petitions [(S.C.)] had directed the petitioner to approach the High Court, by bringing the notification, dated 21-5-1955, issued by the Central Board of Excise and Customs to its notice. The notification permits re-testing of samples, in the event of the assessee being dissatisfied, with the samples already taken by the Department, Based on the said order of the Apex Court, the First Bench of this Court had passed an order, dated 1-12-2006, in W.A. M.P. Nos. 1822 to 1825 of 2006, in Writ Appeal Nos. 832 to 835 of 2005.;