9911796707
TMI Blog2006 (6) TMI 43X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... cation), Mumbai. Since the issue involved in both these appeals is one and the same, we are passing a common order. 2. The appellants exported goods under claim for Drawback. The first appellant received an amount of Rs. 4,58,706/- as Drawback. The second appellant received a sum of Rs. 3,54,621/-. DRI investigations revealed that the appellants had not received the export proceeds within the period allowed. Therefore, Show Cause Notices were issued under Rule 16/16A of the Customs and Central Excise Drawback Rules, 1995 for recovery of the drawback amounts. Penalties under Section 117 were also proposed. The Commissioner of Customs passed the impugned orders for recovery of the drawback amounts. However, he dropped the penal proceedings ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Commissioner adjudicating. the case wherein the Show Cause Notice was answerable to the Additional Commissioner. He also stated that the DRI officers have been empowered to act as officers of Customs by way of Notification issued by the Central Government. 7. We have gone through the records of the case carefully. In the Raza Textiles Ltd. case, the Apex Court has held that no authority, much less a quasi judicial authority can confer jurisdiction on itself by deciding a jurisdictional fact wrongly. In our view this case cannot be applied to the present case the reason that DRI Officers have been empowered to act as Officer Customs under Notification No. 17/2002-Cus. (NT) dated 7.3.2002, i reproduced below: ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ue Intelligence posted at Headquarters and Zonal/regional units [Notification No.17/2002-cus. (NT.), dated 7.3.2002] 8. A clear reading of the Notification reveals that it is the Central Government which has given jurisdiction to the DRI Officers to exercise the powers of Officers of Customs for the whole of India. It is not the case of the appellants that the DRI Officers have usurped the powers themselves. This notification has been issued by the Central Government under section 4(1) of the customs Act. 9.As regards the objection raised by the appellants for the Commissioner adjudicate the case, it is seen that under Section 5 (2) of the Customs Act, "An Officer of Customs may exerc ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of the fundamental principles of natural justice. In the present case, the DRI investigated the matter. The DRI has been given powers of the Officer for the whole of India. Show Cause Notices have been issued. Just because the DRI officer issued the Show Cause Notice no prejudice is caused to the appellants and they cannot argue that Principles of Natural Justice have been violated because DRI officer issued the Show Cause Notice. This is an absurd argument which totally ignores Notification No. 17/2002 Cus. (NT). 11.In the Ramnarain Bishwanath case, the goods were cleared from Bombay Port. The Supreme Court held that it is the Customs authorities at Bombay who have the jurisdiction to decide the valuation of the goods even though th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
