1. The petitioner's grievance appears to be that while assessing customs duty under section 25 of the Customs Act, the respondents, instead of determining the value of the imported goods, had not assessed the same on the basis of the value operating at the time of import, i,e,, October,1994, but merely on the basis of value operating three years earlier, i,e,, in 1991, which was much higher.
2. Indeed, section 25(1) of the Customs Act (as it then stood) read with section 30, required that assessm ent be made on the price prevailing on the date of import. Though it is not possible for this Court to assess the value in exercise of Constitutional jurisdiction, it needs to be observed that assessm ent on the basis of value prevailing three years prior to the date of import appears to be arbitrary.
3. We would, therefore, allow this petition and remand the matter to the Collector of Customs (Appraisement), who would cause assessm ent in accordance with law within two months from today.
4. With the above observations, the petition stands disposed of. revisions by the competent authorities. Therefore, it is advisable to consult the official sources or legal professionals for the most up-to-date and accurate information.