2022 (1) TMI 440 - HC - Customs

Seeking grant of interim relief - jurisdiction - power to issue SCN - HELD THAT - It is informed by learned advocate for the respondents that an application for review of the decision in M/S CANON INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED VERSUS COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS 2021 (3) TMI 384 - SUPREME COURT is pending before the Supreme Court and that a policy decision has been taken to carry all orders of the High Courts in appeal where show-cause notices have been or are being interdicted based on the decision in Canon India Pvt. Ltd. and COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS, KANDLA VERSUS M/S. AGARWAL METALS AND ALLOYS 2021 (9) TMI 316 - SUPREME COURT . It is informed that till date no interim order has been passed in the review application. The petitioner has set up a strong case for grant of interim relief - Application disposed off.

Summary

Issues:
Challenge to show-cause notice dated February 28, 2019 based on lack of jurisdiction. Interpretation of Supreme Court decisions regarding jurisdiction in similar cases. Pending review application before the Supreme Court. Likelihood of challenge to a High Court judgment. Granting of interim relief restraining recovery of duty and penalty.

Analysis:
The writ petition challenges a show-cause notice issued on February 28, 2019, citing lack of jurisdiction. The petitioner's counsel relies on Supreme Court decisions, including M/s. Canon India Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Customs and Commissioner of Customs, Kandla vs. M/s. Agarwal Metals and Alloys, to argue the notice lacks jurisdiction. Additionally, the petitioner cites a previous judgment by the same Bench to support their claim for setting aside the notice.

The respondents' counsel informs about a pending review application before the Supreme Court related to the Canon India Pvt. Ltd. case and a policy decision to appeal High Court orders where show-cause notices have been challenged based on this decision. It is mentioned that the judgment cited by the petitioner is likely to be challenged before the Supreme Court soon, although no interim order has been issued in the review application.

Considering the circumstances, the Court finds that the petitioner has a strong case for interim relief. An interim order is granted restraining the respondents from taking any steps for the recovery of differential duty, interest, and penalty as per the impugned show-cause notice. The respondents are directed to file a reply affidavit within six weeks, with a provision for a rejoinder within two weeks thereafter. The Court grants liberty to apply for early disposal of the writ petition based on the outcome of the pending review application before the Supreme Court.