9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (11) TMI 1122X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 09.2017 under Section 124 of the Customs Act, 1962 [in short the Act ]. The main ground on which the show cause notice is questioned is by contending that the respondent has come to a foregone conclusion that the petitioner is involved in smuggling, whereas the petitioner had no earlier opportunity to put forth their case, apart from the fact, the petitioner did not have opportunity to object to the Authority extending the period by six months under Section 110(2) of the Act. 3.This Court, on being prima facie satisfied on the submissions made by the learned Senior Counsel while entertaining the writ petition, granted a protective interim order on 05.10.2017 as follows:- "Heard Mr.B.Kumar, the learned Senior Counsel assisted by Mr.S.Siva ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... against them. Further, it has been stated that the show cause notice, dated 26.4.2016 has been issued, so as to comply with statutory time limit prescribed under Section 110 of the Act. The said show cause notice was adjudicated, and on 31.03.2017, an order was passed, by which, the gold biscuits, gold bars and the packing materials were absolutely confiscated, and the vehicle, which was involved in the offence was also ordered to be confiscated, and personal penalty was imposed on each of the aforesaid three notices. 4. It is submitted that, after the conclusion of the said proceedings, the impugned show cause notice has been issued, calling upon the petitioner to show cause as to why penalty, commensurate with the gravity of repeated ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... suant to the impugned show cause notice, dated 08.09.2017. List the matter on 27.10.2017." 4.Subsequently, the matter was heard on 01.11.2017. On the said date, the learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner would be satisfied if the adjudication of the impugned show cause notice is done by the adjudicating authority without any reference to the findings in the adjudication order dated 31.03.2017, which pertains to three persons. Therefore, this Court recorded the submissions and directed the learned Senior Panel Counsel for the Revenue to get instructions and passed the following order on 01.11.2017:- "Heard Mr.B.Kumar, learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner and Mr.V.Sundareswaran, learned Standing Co ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Commissioner of Customs (Preventive), Trichy, who is the adjudicating authority for the said case and paragraph no.8 of the affidavit would be relevant, which is quoted hereinbelow:- "8.I state that accordingly, the Joint Commissioner of Customs, Trichy do undertake to adjudicate the above said Show Cause Notice F.No.DRICZU/TTN/VIII/48/INT-2015 dated 08.09.2017 without being influenced by the findings rendered in the Order in Original No.TCP-CUSTOMS-PRV-ADC-014-17 dated 31.03.2017 but based upon the available material and statement recorded under the provisions of the Customs Act, 1962." 6.The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, on instructions, submits that the averments set out in paragraph no.8 of the affidavit of undertaki ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
