2014 (6) TMI 850 - HC - Customs

Modification of stay order - Interference with SCN - learned Single Judge stayed the SCN - suspension of the petitioner s registration under the Courier Imports and Exports (Clearance) Regulations, 1998 - Held that - Stay can be confined to the actual passing of final orders pursuant to the show cause notices impugned in the Writ Petitions. If so, no serious prejudice would be caused to any of the parties - The interim stay granted by the learned Single Judge is modified and the stay is confined to actual passing of final orders on the basis of the show cause notices. It is made clear that the proceedings pursuant to the show cause notices may go on, but the stay is confined to actual passing of final orders - Decided partly in favour of Revenue.

Summary

Issues involved:
Interim orders in writ petitions challenged regarding show cause notices under Customs Act, 1962; Validity of show cause notices; Applicability of statutory remedies; Justifiability of approaching High Court for relief; Scope of discretionary jurisdiction in entertaining writ petitions; Interpretation of interim stay orders.

Analysis:

1. Interim Orders and Show Cause Notices: The Writ Appeals challenged interim orders in Writ Petitions related to show cause notices issued under Section 28(4)(b) and (c) of the Customs Act, 1962. The show cause notices were stayed by the learned Single Judge, preventing further proceedings based on the allegations contained in the notices.

2. Validity of Show Cause Notices: The appellants argued that the show cause notices were comprehensive and contained all relevant details necessary for the concerned parties to respond meaningfully. They contended that interference with show cause notices in writ proceedings is not warranted unless the notices are without jurisdiction.

3. Applicability of Statutory Remedies: The counsel for the appellants emphasized that the writ petitioners had statutory remedies available to challenge the show cause notices. They argued that approaching the High Court to contest the notices was not justified given the existence of such remedies.

4. Discretionary Jurisdiction and Fairness: Referring to legal precedents, it was highlighted that a writ court may not typically entertain a writ petition challenging a show cause notice unless it is issued without jurisdiction. The importance of fairness and lack of bias in show cause notices and subsequent proceedings was underscored based on relevant case law.

5. Scope of Interim Stay Orders: The Court opined that the stay granted by the learned Single Judge should be limited to the actual passing of final orders based on the show cause notices. This modification aimed to ensure that the proceedings could continue, but the stay would only affect the final decisions.

6. Final Disposition: The Writ Appeals were disposed of by modifying the interim stay order to restrict its application to the actual passing of final orders on the basis of the show cause notices. The modified stay order was set to remain in force for four months, during which both parties were permitted to seek an urgent hearing of the Writ Petitions before the learned Single Judge.