Granted.
2. The petitioner had imported certain quantities of pigments of various colour and the price of US $ 1.50 per Kg. Was declared in the bill of entry. The goods arrived in April, 2001 and on 22-5-2001 the Respondent No,3 addressed a letter to the petitioner stating that he had received offers for purchase of the same pigments at the rate of US $ 3.50 per Kg. Alongwith customs duty and other tax. Accordingly the Respondent No,3 notified to the petitioner to clear the goods upon payment of duty on the basis of value at the rate of US $ 3.50 per Kg. And stated that in the event of failure to pay within seven days the goods would be taken over on payment of value declared in the bill of entry and an amount equal to 5% of such declared value. The petitioner has called in question the validity of the aforesaid order/notice, dated 22-5-2001.
' After having heard the learned counsel for the petitioner at length we are of the view that prima facie the order is quite fair and in accordance with sprit of section 25 of the Customs Act. The petitioner was given the option of getting the goods released after payment of duty according to the value determined by Respondent No,3 under section 25 of the Customs Act and only in the event of failure to do so the right to acquire the goods on payment of value declared in the bill .Of entry together with an extra amount of 5% was exercised. In any event, even if the order suffers from any illegalities A the petitioners could always seek appellate and revisional remedies in the hierarchy in the Tribunal established under the Customs Act. We are, therefore, not inclined to interfere with the impugned order and dismiss the petition in limine. The observations made above, however, are only tentative and will not prejudice the petitioner in case he chooses to approach any appropriate forum for redress. The petitioner will also be free to approach the concerned authorities and seek extension of time for compliance of the impugned order, if he so desires.