ARINDAM SINHA,J. - (1.) The application and appeal were taken up for hearing together, the formalities being dispensed with.
(2.) The appellant imported four consignments of solar re-chargeable emergency lights which according to it are to be classified under Customs Tariff Heading 9405 50 40 attracting the benefit of Notification Nos. 12 and 21 of 2012, both dated 17th March, 2012. The bills of entry were filed for first check. On first check the proper officer of Customs classified the goods under Customs Tariff Heading 8513 10 90. The appellant challenged such classification by writ petition which was disposed of by order dated 3rd December, 2015. Being aggrieved the writ petitioner is before us in appeal.
(3.) The writ petition was dismissed, without calling for affidavits, on the reasons given in the impugned order as are reproduced below : "In the instant case, however, it is noticed that the petitioner's initial self-assessed bills of entry were verified by a proper officer and at the time of verification a query was raised by the proper officer to the petitioner "to please explain the goods". In response, the petitioner "requested for 1st check". Consequently the proper officer noted change in classification of the imported goods. Whether this electronic conversation tantamounts to reassessment is required to be answered in the negative. The reason is, if there was a case of reassessment, the proper officer would have revised the values given by the importer while self-assessing the duty leviable on the goods imported. In the instant case, however, the imported goods were self-assessed by the petitioner under a different classification and on query made by the proper officer the petitioner requested for "1st check" and thus allowed the proper officer to reclassify the imported goods under a different classification head, which does not amount to reassessment. That apart and in any event, the petitioner accepted the reclassification of the imported goods without any demur or protest between October, 2014 and February, 2015 and thereafter cannot approach this Court by filing the writ petition in the month of July, 2015, seeking a mandatory order directing the proper officer to pass a speaking order, which was required to be passed within fifteen days.";