Ask Jurishour AI

Generic selectors
Exact matches only
Search in title
Search in content
Post Type Selectors
tdb_templates
saswp_reviews
saswp-collections
saswp_rvs_location
tdc-review-email
web-story-font
web-story
googlesitekit_email
tds_locker
tds_email
saswp
mailpoet_page
mailpoet_email
tdcpt_tunes
tdc-review
pronamic_payment
pronamic_gateway
pronamic_pay_subscr
wpcode
HomeIndirect TaxesBombay High Court Flags Customs Reassessment Without Speaking Order as Procedurally Invalid

Bombay High Court Flags Customs Reassessment Without Speaking Order as Procedurally Invalid

Published on

🚀 Stay Connected With JurisHour

WhatsApp X Telegram

The Bombay High Court has granted relief in a case involving reassessment of imported goods, setting aside earlier customs action taken without a “speaking order” as mandated by the law.

The bench of Justice M. S. Sonak and Justice Jitendra Jain, ruled in favour of the petitioner on grounds of violation of Sections 17(4) and 17(5) of the Customs Act, 1962. The reassessed Bills of Entry, challenged by Asahi India Glass, were issued without due justification or adherence to statutory procedure.

The petitioner-company submitted that the reassessment was carried out without issuing a speaking order within the 15-day statutory window—a violation of Section 17(5). He further highlighted that the customs classification (CTH 7005 10) had previously been accepted by the authorities for identical goods, lending weight to the argument of procedural arbitrariness.

While the customs department—represented by Advocate Shruti Vyas—maintained that the reassessments were provisional and subject to lab test results, the court was not persuaded to dismiss the writ on grounds of alternative remedy. The court emphasized that where principles of natural justice and fair play are compromised, a writ petition is maintainable.

The Deputy Commissioner of Customs has now been directed to issue a show cause notice to the company within 15 days, and dispose of the matter with a reasoned (speaking) order within four weeks of the company’s response.

The court also clarified that Asahi India Glass retains the liberty to raise the plea of limitation and all available defences in the response to the upcoming show cause notice.

As informed by counsel for the petitioner, Asahi India Glass has already paid the customs duty under protest to ensure release of its goods. 

The court order ensures that future proceedings will not prejudice the company’s right to dispute the basis of that duty.

Case Details

Case Title:  M/s. Asahi India Glass Ltd. Versus Deputy Commissioner of Customs,

Case No.: WRIT PETITION (L) NO.4468 OF 2025 

Date:  8 July 2025

Counsel For  Petitioner:  Anshumaan Sahni 

Counsel For Respondent: Shruti Vyas 

Read More: GST/HST Tax Breaks in Canada: A Detailed Look at Recent Relief Measures and Ongoing Credits

Mariya Paliwala
Mariya Paliwalahttps://www.jurishour.in/
Mariya is the Senior Editor at Juris Hour. She has 7+ years of experience on covering tax litigation stories from the Supreme Court, High Courts and various tribunals including CESTAT, ITAT, NCLAT, NCLT, etc. Mariya graduated from MLSU Law College, Udaipur (Raj.) with B.A.LL.B. and also holds an LL.M. She started her career as a freelance tax reporter in the leading online legal news companies.

Latest articles

GST Demand Can’t Exceed Amount Proposed in SCN: Allahabad High Court Quashes Rs. 20.47 Crore Order

The Allahabad High Court has set aside a GST adjudication order confirming a demand...

Indemnity Clause Can’t Shield Accused From Prosecution Over Alleged Bogus GST Invoices and E-Way Bills: Himachal Pradesh High Court

The Himachal Pradesh High Court has refused to quash an FIR arising from alleged...

JURISHOUR | TAX LAW DAILY BULLETIN : 2 SEPTEMBER, 2026

Here’s the Tax Law Daily Bulletin for  September 2, 2026.GSTCAN TOLL-COLLECTION RIGHTS BE TREATED...

Calcutta High Court Orders Bank Account Defreezing on 10% Deposit; Examines Validity of GST Limitation Extension for FY 2018-19

The Calcutta High Court has granted interim protection against coercive recovery in a Goods...

More like this

GST Demand Can’t Exceed Amount Proposed in SCN: Allahabad High Court Quashes Rs. 20.47 Crore Order

The Allahabad High Court has set aside a GST adjudication order confirming a demand...

Indemnity Clause Can’t Shield Accused From Prosecution Over Alleged Bogus GST Invoices and E-Way Bills: Himachal Pradesh High Court

The Himachal Pradesh High Court has refused to quash an FIR arising from alleged...

JURISHOUR | TAX LAW DAILY BULLETIN : 2 SEPTEMBER, 2026

Here’s the Tax Law Daily Bulletin for  September 2, 2026.GSTCAN TOLL-COLLECTION RIGHTS BE TREATED...