Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, JKC General Trading Company, a partnership firm, imported goods and was assessed customs duty by the respondents. The petitioner paid the duty under protest and requested a speaking order under Section 17(5) of the Customs Act, 1962, for reassessment. However, the respondents failed to pass any speaking order. The petitioner filed a writ petition before the Bombay High Court seeking a direction to the respondents to pass a speaking order. The court heard the counsel for both parties. The petitioner's counsel argued that the issue was covered by the case of Canon India Private Limited v. Union of India in Writ Petition No.9937 of 2025. The court noted that on 24 November 2025, it had already made an order posting the matter for final disposal, observing that the respondents had not passed a speaking order despite the petitioner paying duty under protest. The court allowed the petition, quashed the assessment order, and directed the respondents to pass a speaking order within two weeks from the date of the order. The court also made rule absolute and disposed of the petition.
Headnote
A) Customs Law - Section 17(5) of the Customs Act, 1962 - Speaking Order - Mandatory Duty - The petitioner imported goods and paid customs duty under protest, requesting a speaking order for reassessment. The respondents failed to pass any speaking order. The court held that the failure to pass a speaking order under Section 17(5) is arbitrary and contrary to the statutory mandate, relying on Canon India Private Limited v. Union of India. The court directed the respondents to pass a speaking order within two weeks from the date of the order. (Paras 1-5)
B) Customs Law - Payment Under Protest - Right to Speaking Order - The petitioner paid customs duty under protest, which does not extinguish the right to a speaking order under Section 17(5) of the Customs Act, 1962. The court held that the authorities must pass a speaking order when requested, irrespective of payment under protest. (Paras 2-4)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the failure of the customs authorities to pass a speaking order under Section 17(5) of the Customs Act, 1962, despite the petitioner having paid customs duty under protest, is arbitrary and violative of the statutory mandate.
Final Decision
The court allowed the petition, quashed the assessment order, and directed the respondents to pass a speaking order under Section 17(5) of the Customs Act, 1962, within two weeks from the date of the order. Rule made absolute. Petition disposed of.
Law Points
- Section 17(5) of the Customs Act
- 1962 mandates a speaking order upon request for reassessment
- payment under protest does not waive right to speaking order
- Canon India Private Limited v. Union of India precedent
Case Details
Writ Petition No. 15775 of 2025
M.S. Sonak, Advait M. Sethna
Prathamesh Chavan, Channdi Tanna, Sangeeta Yadav, Karan Adik
JKC General Trading Company
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India challenging the failure of customs authorities to pass a speaking order under Section 17(5) of the Customs Act, 1962.
Remedy Sought
Direction to the respondents to pass a speaking order under Section 17(5) of the Customs Act, 1962, and quashing of the assessment order.
Filing Reason
The petitioner paid customs duty under protest and requested a speaking order for reassessment, but the respondents failed to pass any speaking order.
Previous Decisions
The court had on 24 November 2025 posted the matter for final disposal, noting that the respondents had not passed a speaking order despite the petitioner paying duty under protest.
Issues
Whether the failure of the customs authorities to pass a speaking order under Section 17(5) of the Customs Act, 1962, despite the petitioner having paid customs duty under protest, is arbitrary and violative of the statutory mandate.
Submissions/Arguments
The petitioner's counsel submitted that the respondents failed to pass a speaking order under Section 17(5) of the Customs Act even though the petitioner paid the customs duty under protest.
The petitioner's counsel submitted that the issue raised in this petition is covered by the case of Canon India Private Limited v. Union of India in Writ Petition No.9937 of 2025.
Ratio Decidendi
The failure of the customs authorities to pass a speaking order under Section 17(5) of the Customs Act, 1962, despite the petitioner having paid customs duty under protest, is arbitrary and contrary to the statutory mandate. The authorities are duty-bound to pass a speaking order when requested, and payment under protest does not waive this right.
Judgment Excerpts
Heard Mr Prathamesh Chavan, learned counsel for the Petitioner and Ms Sangeeta Yadav, for the Respondent.
Even otherwise, on 24 November 2025, we had made the following order posting this matter for final disposal: -
Mr. Chavan submits that in this case the Respondents are not passing any ‘speaking order’ under Section 17(5) of the Customs Act even though the Petitioner paid the customs duty ‘under protest’.
Mr. Chavan submits that the issue raised in this Petition is covered by the case of Canon India Private Limited Vs. Union of India in Writ Petition No.9937 of 2025.
Accordingly, we post this Petition for final disposal on 1st December 2025.
Procedural History
The petitioner filed Writ Petition No. 15775 of 2025 before the Bombay High Court. On 24 November 2025, the court heard the counsel and posted the matter for final disposal on 1 December 2025, noting the failure to pass a speaking order. On 1 December 2025, the court allowed the petition and directed the respondents to pass a speaking order within two weeks.
Acts & Sections
- Customs Act, 1962: Section 17(5)
