2008 (2) TMI 357 - HC - Customs

Single Judge rejected the Writ petition (WP) & not interferred with the orders impugned in the WP - Writ Appeal is required to be dismissed on the ground of inordinate delay and laches caused in filing the Writ Petition as the appellant has not explained the delay by proper/tenable reasons as the impugned orders were passed in the year 2000 and 2004 which are challenged undisputedly after lapse of 7 and 3 years in the WP single judge order that natural justice not violated is upheld

Issues:
1. Dismissal of the writ petition by the learned Single Judge.
2. Inordinate delay in filing the Writ Petition.
3. Violation of principles of natural justice in passing the impugned orders.
4. Declining to quash the subsequent order passed in the Review Petition.
5. Exercise of discretionary power by the learned Single Judge.

Issue 1: Dismissal of the writ petition by the learned Single Judge
The appeal questioned the correctness of the learned Single Judge's order dismissing the writ petition and refusing to exercise discretionary power to quash the impugned orders dated 8-11-2000 and 17-5-2004. The appellant sought to set aside the Single Judge's order and quash the impugned orders in the writ petition.

Issue 2: Inordinate delay in filing the Writ Petition
The Writ Appeal was deemed necessary to be dismissed due to the significant delay and laches in filing the Writ Petition. The appellant failed to provide adequate reasons for the delay in challenging the orders passed in 2000 and 2004, which were contested after 7 and 3 years, respectively. The earlier Writ Petition only addressed the challenge of an order by the Customs, Excise, and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal, not the subsequent orders.

Issue 3: Violation of principles of natural justice in passing the impugned orders
The appellant contended that the orders impugned were passed without providing an opportunity to respond, thus violating principles of natural justice. However, the learned Single Judge found that the appellant did not comply with the conditions for importing hospital equipment under concessional duty, despite being called upon to do so. The Single Judge concluded that there was no violation of natural justice as the appellant did not respond to show-cause notices or reminders.

Issue 4: Declining to quash the subsequent order passed in the Review Petition
The learned Single Judge declined to grant the prayer to quash the order passed in the Review Petition, citing legal contentions raised by the appellant's counsel. The appellant's representation to review the order was rejected due to the respondent's inability to do so after four years. The Single Judge found no reason to interfere with the earlier order withdrawing duty exemption granted to the appellant.

Issue 5: Exercise of discretionary power by the learned Single Judge
The learned Single Judge was justified in not interfering with the impugned orders, stating that there was no illegality in the respondent's actions. He declined to exercise discretionary power to grant relief in the Writ Petition, as he found no reason to do so. The appeal was deemed devoid of merit and subsequently dismissed.

← Previous Next →