9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2017 (9) TMI 296 - AT - CustomsJurisdiction - power of DRI to issue SCN - Held that - the notice issued by the DRI who was not a competent authority as per the ratio laid down in the case of Mangali Impex Ltd. Vs. UOI 2016 (5) TMI 225 - DELHI HIGH COURT - In this connection, we note that similar issues have been dealt with in various cases by the Tribunal recently. It is held that the matters have to be remanded back to the original authority for a decision - appeal allowed by way of remand.
Issues:
Jurisdiction of DRI officers to issue show cause notice under Customs Act. Analysis: The appeals were filed against orders passed by the Commissioner of Customs (Port), Kolkata. Both parties agreed that the notice was issued by DRI, which they argued was not a competent authority based on a Delhi High Court judgment. The Tribunal noted similar issues in past cases. The appellant argued that DRI officers were not proper officers under the Customs Act, citing a Supreme Court decision. The Customs Act was amended post the Supreme Court decision, empowering DRI officers to issue demand notices. Subsequent amendments assigned proper officer functions to DRI officers with retrospective effect. Conflicting views on DRI officers' jurisdiction were seen in different High Court judgments. The matter reached the Supreme Court, which stayed the Delhi High Court judgment. A recent Delhi High Court judgment granted liberty to review challenges based on the outcome of Supreme Court appeals. Following the Delhi High Court's ratio, the Tribunal set aside the impugned order and remanded the matter to decide jurisdiction after the Supreme Court's decision. The appeals were allowed by way of remand. The Tribunal's decision aligned with past cases and considered the evolving legal landscape post the Supreme Court's judgment. The issue revolved around the jurisdiction of DRI officers to issue show cause notices under the Customs Act. The Tribunal's approach was consistent with legal principles and aimed to ensure a fair hearing for the assessee post the Supreme Court's decision. The remand provided an opportunity for the original adjudicating authority to decide jurisdiction based on the Supreme Court's ruling, maintaining status quo until a final decision. The decision reflected a balanced consideration of legal precedents and the need for clarity on jurisdictional matters post the Supreme Court's intervention. Overall, the judgment delved into the complex issue of jurisdiction concerning DRI officers under the Customs Act. It analyzed past legal interpretations, amendments to the Customs Act, and conflicting High Court judgments. The Tribunal's decision to remand the matter for fresh decision post the Supreme Court's intervention showcased a commitment to upholding legal principles and ensuring a fair hearing for the appellants. By aligning with the Delhi High Court's approach and considering the totality of facts and circumstances, the Tribunal provided a structured framework for resolving the jurisdictional issue while awaiting the Supreme Court's final decision. The detailed analysis highlighted the legal intricacies involved and the importance of clarity in determining the proper authority for issuing show cause notices under the Customs Act.
|
