9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (9) TMI 276X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tish Chandra, President And Mr. Ashok K. Arya, Member (Technical) (Rep. by Sh. R. Santhanam Sh. A. P. Sinha, Advocates) - for the Appellant (Rep. by Sh. S. K. Bansal, AR) - for the Respondent ORDER Per: (Dr.) Satish Chandra All these appeals are filed against the order-in-original No.33/2006-07 dated 31.03.2007 by which the department has confirmed the demand of differential duty on the company as well as imposed penalty on the appellants. 2. During course of hearing, both the sides agreed that the notice has been issued by the DRI which resulted in the impugned orders and drawn our attention to Grounds of appeal where in clause (k) it is mentioned that- (k) The impugned show cause notice is for the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... pex Ltd. Vs. UOI dated 03.05.2016 has observed that the DRI is not competent to issue the show cause notices. Hence, the request is being made to set aside the present proceedings where the notice was issued by the DRI. 2. On the other hand, learned Counsel for the Department has justified the notice issued by DRI and made a request to decide the matter on merit. 3. We have heard both the parties at length and gone through the material available on record. 4. From the record, it appears that the preliminary issue emerges in the present appeal is regarding the jurisdiction of the DRI Officers to issue the show cause notice under the Customs Act. The assessee-Appellant had taken a stand that in terms of the Hon ble Apex Cour ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ourt in the case of Mangali Impex Ltd. Vs. Union of India [2016 (335) E.L.T. 605 (Del.)], and the High Court inter-alia, held that even the new inserted Section 28 (11) does not empower either the officers of DRI or the DGCEI to issue the SCN for the period prior to 08/04/2011. Thus, it is seen that the said order of the Hon ble Delhi High Court is in favour of the assessee and against the Revenue. 9. However, it is further noticed that the said issue was also the subject matter of Hon ble Mumbai High Court in the case of Sunil Gupta Vs. Union of India [2015 (315) E.L.T. 167 (Bom) as also of the Hon ble High Court of Telangana and Andhra Pradesh in the case of Vuppalamritha Magnetic Components Ltd. Vs. DRI (Zonal Unit), Chennai [ ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
