2020 (3) TMI 858 - HC - Customs

Maintainability of appeal - appellant submitted that till the clarification is issued by the Kingdom of Thailand in terms of the said order, no effective reply could be given to the impugned show cause notice dated 14.11.2012 and therefore, no useful purpose will be served by relegating the Assessee before the concerned authority - HELD THAT - No interference is called for in the order of the learned Single Judge, which in our opinion, adequately protects the interest of the Assessee / appellant before the concerned authority as well. It is needless to say that explanation has to be submitted by the Assessee in pursuance of the impugned notice dated 14.11.2012 and the Assessee is free to raise all the contentions before the concerned authority. Since the learned single Judge has already protected the interests of the Assessee / appellant that no final order will be passed by the concerned authroity without appropriate explanation with regard to the treaty to the Kingdom of Thailand, we think that when such clarifications are received by the Government, the Assessee is bound to again have his say before the concerned authority. The directions issued by the learned Single Judge call for no interference by this Court - Appeal disposed off.

Summary

Issues:
Interpretation of a show cause notice dated 14.11.2012 - Applicability of directions given by the learned Single Judge - Protection of Assessee's interests during proceedings - Clarification required from the Kingdom of Thailand - Validity of the impugned order - Need for interference in the order of the learned Single Judge.

Analysis:
The case involves a Writ Appeal filed by the Assessee against the order of a learned Single Judge. The Single Judge had directed the Assessee to submit an explanation to a show cause notice dated 14.11.2012 within four weeks, with a requirement to maintain status quo until the conclusion of the proceedings. The Assessee, represented by Mr. Murali Kumaran, argued that no effective reply could be given until clarification is received from the Kingdom of Thailand. On the other hand, Mr. V. Sundareswaran, representing the Revenue, supported the impugned order. After hearing both parties, the High Court, comprising of Dr. Justice Vineet Kothari and Mr. Justice R. Suresh Kumar, concluded that the Single Judge's order adequately protected the Assessee's interests. The High Court emphasized the necessity for the Assessee to submit an explanation in response to the notice and to raise all contentions before the concerned authority. The High Court acknowledged the importance of awaiting clarifications from the Kingdom of Thailand and highlighted that the Assessee would have the opportunity to present their case again based on the received clarifications. Consequently, the High Court found no grounds for interference in the Single Judge's directions, leading to the disposal of the Writ Appeal without any costs.

In summary, the High Court upheld the Single Judge's order, emphasizing the importance of the Assessee submitting an explanation to the show cause notice and being given the opportunity to present their case before the concerned authority. The High Court recognized the significance of awaiting clarifications from the Kingdom of Thailand and highlighted the Assessee's right to address the authority again based on the received clarifications. The High Court found no reason to interfere in the Single Judge's directions, leading to the disposal of the Writ Appeal without imposing any costs.