2020 (5) TMI 250 - HC - Customs

Contempt petition on Customs Broker (CB) alongwith several official enquiry - applicability of Section 147(2) of the Customs Act, 1962 - principles of natural justice - HELD THAT - Section 147(2) of the Customs Act, 1962 is applicable to the exporter and not applicable to the agent. The petitioners are the agent and they are nothing to do with the exporters obligations. However, the respondents issued time barred show-cause notice, without jurisdiction - petitioners further submit that the time to reply the show cause notice was expired. The petitioners are permitted to canvass all those points before the adjudicating authority, by way of proper reply, on or before 31.03.2020, and thereafter, the 1st respondent shall complete the adjudication proceedings in respect of show-cause notice dated 25.02.2020 and pass appropriate order, in accordance with law, on or before 31.04.2020 - Petition allowed by way of remand.

Summary

Issues:
Customs clearance delay due to non-availability of E-way bill, Detention of goods by the second respondent, Allegations of harassment by the second respondent, Delay in investigation completion, Issuance of a time-barred show-cause notice.

Customs Clearance Delay:
The petitioners, acting as agents, faced a delay in customs clearance due to the non-availability of an E-way bill. Despite sending the E-way bill to the second respondent, the goods were detained, causing further complications in the shipment process.

Detention of Goods:
Following the delay in customs clearance, the second respondent detained the goods and initiated an inquiry into the matter. The exporter provided explanations regarding the goods being automobile spare parts, which are not prohibited or unlawful. However, the second respondent continued to summon the petitioners for explanations, leading to allegations of harassment.

Allegations of Harassment:
The petitioners alleged that the second respondent was harassing them by withholding customs clearance, calling for multiple inquiries, and issuing a time-barred show-cause notice. This alleged harassment prompted the petitioners to file a writ petition seeking relief from the court.

Delay in Investigation Completion:
Despite a court order directing the completion of the investigation within a specified timeframe, the investigation was not concluded as per the court's instructions. The petitioners raised concerns about the delay in completing the investigation, leading to the issuance of the impugned show-cause notice.

Time-Barred Show-Cause Notice:
The petitioners argued that the show-cause notice issued by the respondents was time-barred and lacked jurisdiction. They contended that Section 147(2) of the Customs Act, 1962 applied to the exporter and not to the agent, thereby questioning the validity of the notice.

In conclusion, the court permitted the petitioners to present their arguments before the adjudicating authority and instructed the respondents to complete the adjudication proceedings by a specified date. The writ petition was disposed of without costs, bringing an end to the legal proceedings in this matter.