Customs Act, 1962 › Chapter V — Levy of, and Exemption from, Customs Duties

Section 17. Assessment of duty

Customs Act, 1962

Bare Act

Assessment of duty. —

(1) An importer entering any imported goods under section 46, or an exporter entering any export goods under section 50, shall, save as otherwise provided in section 85, self-assess the duty, if any, leviable on such goods.

(2) The proper officer may verify the the entries made under section 46 or section 50 and the self assessment of goods referred to in sub-section (1) and for this purpose, examine or test any imported goods or export goods or such part thereof as may be necessary.

Provided that the selection of cases for verification shall primarily be on the basis of risk evaluation through appropriate selection criteria.

(3) For the purposes of verification under sub-section (2), the proper officer may require the importer, exporter or any other person to produce any document or information, whereby the duty leviable on the imported goods or export goods, as the case may be, can be ascertained and thereupon, the importer, exporter or such other person shall produce such document or furnish such information.

(4) Where it is found on verification, examination or testing of the goods or otherwise that the self- assessment is not done correctly, the proper officer may, without prejudice to any other action which may be taken under this Act, re-assess the duty leviable on such goods.

(5) Where any re-assessment done under sub-section (4) is contrary to the self-assessment done by the importer or exporter [Omitted] and in cases other than those where the importer or exporter, as the case may be, confirms his acceptance of the said re- assessment in writing, the proper officer shall pass a speaking order on the re-assessment, within fifteen days from the date of re-assessment of the bill of entry or the shipping bill, as the case may be.

[Omitted]

Explanation. — For the removal of doubts, it is hereby declared that in cases where an importer has entered any imported goods under section 46 or an exporter has entered any export goods under section 50 before the date on which the Finance Bill, 2011 receives the assent of the President, such imported goods or export goods shall continue to be governed by the provisions of section 17 as it stood immediately before the date on which such assent is received.

Explanation in plain English

Section 17 makes the importer or exporter work out the duty on their own goods. The proper officer can check this self-assessment, examine or test the goods, and ask for documents. If the duty is wrong, the officer can re-assess it and take other action under the Act. If the trader does not accept the re-assessment in writing, the officer must give reasons within fifteen days. A broker files these entries, so the broker must get the duty right the first time.

  • Where Section 85 provides otherwise, self-assessment does not apply.
  • The officer may examine or test the whole consignment or only a part of it.
  • Case selection must primarily follow risk evaluation through selection criteria.
  • The call for documents or information can reach any other person, not only the trader.
  • Re-assessment does not block any other action the Act allows.
  • Goods entered before the Finance Bill, 2011 assent date keep the old assessment law.

Judgments on Section 17

  • Maruti Fabric Impex vs Ce & Cgst Noida — CESTAT, 7 Sep 2026. A written acceptance of value enhancement waives only the limited procedural right to a speaking order under Section 17(5) and, there being no estoppel against a statute, cannot foreclose the importer's statutory right…
  • Shree Grotex Trade Links Pvt Ltd vs Cc Sea Ch - Iii — CESTAT, 3 Sep 2026. Where Customs itself obtained test reports on identical goods and consistently accepted the importer's declared classification, no deliberate or blameworthy conduct can be attributed to the importer, and the extended…
  • Imperial Fibres Pvt Ltd vs Mundra — CESTAT, 31 Aug 2026. The extended period under Section 28(4) of the Customs Act cannot be invoked, and a beneficial exemption cannot be denied, where the department's delayed, partial and unauthenticated foreign verification of Certificates…
  • Jaina Marketing And Associates vs Union Of India And Ors — Delhi High Court, 30 Mar 2026. Where duty that was never payable is refunded after prolonged departmental delay in re-assessment and refund, interest at the statutory rate is payable from the date of the importer's first re-assessment application to…
  • Van Oord India Pvt Ltd vs Customs Ahmedabad — CESTAT, 13 Nov 2025. Physical non-availability of goods is no bar to confiscation under Section 111 or redemption fine under Section 125, but the fine must be commensurate with the duty benefit actually accrued, and a Section 114AA penalty…
  • Manasa Impex Services vs Commissioner Of Customs And Central Excise, Coimbatore) With — CESTAT, 21 Aug 2025. A customs broker's failure to perform duties under CHALR attracts disciplinary action under CHALR alone; a penalty under section 114 of the Customs Act requires proof of abetment or active collusion — involvement beyond…
  • Commissioner Of Customs Import 1 Zone 1 vs M/S Essar Bulk Terminal Salaya Limited — CESTAT, 3 Apr 2025. Alleged overvaluation without duty consequence cannot sustain confiscation under section 111(m) or penalties under sections 112/114AA, and the price of goods for export to a country other than India is expressly barred…
  • Vicky Ramchand Asrani vs Mumbai-Air Port — CESTAT, 19 Dec 2024. Illicit import of gold must be deterred, but not by alienation of possession from its owner — where goods are merely restricted and not truly prohibited, absolute confiscation under section 125 fails and the owner is…
  • Commissioner of Customs v. M/s Canon India Private Limited (Review Petition No. 400 of 2021) — Supreme Court of India, 7 Nov 2024. DRI officers assigned functions under section 2(34) are proper officers and may issue show cause notices under section 28.
  • Hemant Bohra vs Commissioner Of Customs-Nhava Sheva -… — CESTAT, 26 Aug 2024. Drawback provisions being an incentive-oriented scheme for augmenting exports, procedural requirements such as Rule 13(1)(a) documentation and Section 149 shipping bill amendment must receive a liberal construction and…
  • Ms Kseg India International vs Ce & Cgst Noida — CESTAT, 18 Jul 2024. Enhancement of the value of imported goods based on a DGOV circular, without rejecting the declared value under Rule 12 and applying the Valuation Rules sequentially from Rule 4 onwards, is unsustainable, and goods that…
  • Yash Pakka Limited vs Lucknow Prev — CESTAT, 14 Feb 2024. Under Section 149 of the Customs Act, 1962, a shipping bill may be amended or converted even after export if supported by documentary evidence in existence at the time of export, and a circular's self-imposed time limit…
  • Samsung India Electronics Pvt Ltd vs Commissioner Of Customs — CESTAT, 24 Jan 2023. A self-assessment recorded in a bill of entry is itself an appealable order under Section 128, and no refund can be claimed or entertained under Section 27 until that self-assessment is modified in accordance with law,…
  • Cisco Commerce India Private Limited vs Commissioner Of Customs — CESTAT, 19 Oct 2022. Once the SVB has accepted a related-party transaction value under Rule 3(3)(a), the department cannot load value on the basis of the importer's own earlier higher-priced imports treated as 'contemporaneous', and any…
  • M/S.N.C.Alexender vs The Commissioner Of Customs — Madras High Court, 9 Jun 2022. Show cause notices and adjudication orders issued by DRI officers are valid because they are appointed as 'Officers of Customs' under Section 4 of the Customs Act, 1962, and Section 97 of the Finance Act, 2022…
  • Messrs Aztec Fluids And Machinery Pvt Ltd vs Union Of India — Gujarat High Court, 1 Apr 2022. A show cause notice for recovery of duty under Section 28 of the Customs Act can be issued only by the 'proper officer', and notices issued by the DRI are without authority and liable to be quashed per M/s Canon India,…
  • M/S.Aabis International vs The Commissioner Of Customs — Madras High Court, 17 Jun 2021. A claim to preferential duty on the strength of a certificate of origin cannot be rejected by a non-speaking order; doubts about the COO must be tested through the verification procedure under Section 28-DA/CAROTAR 2020…
  • M/s Canon India Private Limited v. Commissioner of Customs — Supreme Court of India, 9 Mar 2021. Overruled in 2024. The 2021 ruling held that DRI officers could not issue section 28 notices; the 2024 review judgment reversed this.
  • M/S Jairath International And Another vs Union Of India And Others — Punjab-Haryana High Court, 4 Oct 2019. The customs department has no power under Rule 16 of the Drawback Rules, 1995 or the Valuation Rules, 2007 to re-assess a shipping bill duly assessed at the time of export, because goods already exported are not 'export…
  • Itc Ltd vs Cce, Kolkata Iv — Supreme Court of India, 18 Sep 2019. A refund claim under Section 27 of the Customs Act, 1962 cannot be entertained unless the order of assessment or self-assessment is first modified in accordance with law through appropriate proceedings, because refund…

All 47 judgments