2021 (10) TMI 1335 - HC - Customs

Jurisdiction - proper officer to issue SCN - Section 28(4) of the Customs Act, 1962 - HELD THAT - Ratio laid down by Hon'ble Supreme Court in M/S CANON INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED VERSUS COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS 2021 (3) TMI 384 - SUPREME COURT is the law declared by Hon'ble Supreme Court as of today and therefore as a matter of judicial discipline, this Court is bound to follow the same as contended by learned counsel for respective parties. Writ petition disposed off.

Summary

Issues:
Challenge to a notice issued under Section 28(4) of the Customs Act, 1962 on the ground of not being issued by a proper officer.

Analysis:
The judgment pertains to a challenge against a 'Show Cause Notice' (SCN) issued under Section 28(4) of the Customs Act, 1962. The main contention was that the SCN was not issued by a proper officer. The court noted that the issue was covered by the decisions in Canon India case and Agarwal Metals case by the Hon'ble Supreme Court. It was established that the impugned SCN had not been issued by a 'proper officer' as defined under the Customs Act. The learned Solicitor informed the court about a review petition filed in the Supreme Court and requested a rescheduling of the matter, keeping the SCN in abeyance until the next listing.

The court acknowledged that a batch of writ petitions on the same issue was pending, and directed the registry to group all related writ petitions for a consolidated hearing. Subsequently, the grouped writ petitions were listed under the cause list caption 'GROUPING MATTERS (CUSTOMS ACT).' By consent of counsel and the Additional Solicitor General of India, all the captioned writ petitions were disposed of. The court set aside all show cause notices and consequential orders, preserving the rights of the Department/State to revive them subject to the orders of the Supreme Court in the review applications. It was emphasized that the law declared by the Supreme Court in the Canon India case was binding, and the court was obligated to follow it.

The judgment concluded by disposing of the captioned writ petitions in the manner described. No costs were awarded, and the connected Writ Miscellaneous Petitions (WMPs) were also closed. The court clarified that it had not expressed any view on the merits of the matter, as the fate of the impugned SCNs and consequential orders would depend on the outcome of the review petitions before the Supreme Court. The judgment highlighted the importance of judicial discipline in following the law declared by the Supreme Court.