9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2022 (6) TMI 219 - HC - CustomsJurisdiction - competency of the DRI to issue show cause notice - Section 28 of the Customs Act, 1962 - Power of Tribunal to remand the case without deciding the issues therein on the ground that jurisdiction of the officer to issue show cause notice is under dispute - HELD THAT - The issues involved herein have been considered and decided by a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court, in the case of THE COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS VERSUS M/S. BOX CORRUGATORS AND OFFSET PRINTERS 2020 (5) TMI 475 - MADRAS HIGH COURT where it was held that The issue relating to jurisdiction of DRI Officials to issue show cause notice to the Assessee in such cases is said to be pending before the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Mangli Impex vs. Union of India 2016 (5) TMI 225 - DELHI HIGH COURT , in which the Hon'ble Supreme Court has granted stay order. T he matters are remanded to the Tribunal with a direction to keep the same pending and await the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the appeals filed against the decision in Mangali Impex - Petition closed.
Issues Involved:
Jurisdiction of DRI officials to issue show cause notices under the Customs Act, 1962. Validity of remanding cases by the Tribunal without deciding jurisdictional issues. Analysis: Issue 1: Jurisdiction of DRI officials to issue show cause notices under the Customs Act, 1962. The respondent(s) challenged the jurisdiction of DRI officials to issue show cause notices under the Customs Act, 1962, claiming that these officials were not designated as proper officers during the relevant period. The CESTAT allowed the appeals and remanded the matter to the original authority to decide the jurisdiction issue. The CESTAT referred to various legal developments, including amendments to Section 28 of the Customs Act and conflicting judgments from different High Courts. The CESTAT considered the implications of these legal developments and directed a review of jurisdiction post the Supreme Court's decision in a related case. The High Court acknowledged previous decisions and emphasized the need to await the Supreme Court's decision before making a final determination on jurisdiction. Issue 2: Validity of remanding cases by the Tribunal without deciding jurisdictional issues. The High Court addressed the question of whether the Tribunal was justified in remanding cases without deciding jurisdictional issues. Previous decisions by the High Court highlighted the importance of awaiting the Supreme Court's decision on jurisdiction matters before making a final determination. The High Court referred to a recent case where a similar remand was challenged by the Revenue. The High Court upheld the decision to remand the cases, emphasizing the need to await the Supreme Court's decision on jurisdictional issues. The High Court concluded that the matters should be kept pending until the Supreme Court's decision, ensuring no coercive action against the respondents/assessees. The High Court allowed the appeals, remanded the cases to the Tribunal, and left the substantial questions of law open for future consideration. In summary, the High Court addressed the jurisdictional issues regarding DRI officials' authority to issue show cause notices under the Customs Act, 1962. The Court emphasized the significance of awaiting the Supreme Court's decision on related matters before making final determinations. The High Court allowed the appeals, remanded the cases to the Tribunal, and directed the matters to be kept pending until the Supreme Court's decision, ensuring no coercive action against the respondents/assessees. The Court left the substantial questions of law open for further consideration.
|
