9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (2) TMI 100X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s to the irresistable conclusion that it is only the proper Officer who can issue the show cause notice. What this Court must see is whether the second respondent has been designated as the Officer of Customs and whether he has been also designated as the 'proper officer' in terms of Section 2(34) of the Act. Section 4 of the Customs Act talks about appointment of Officers of Customs and Section 5 talks about their powers - The second respondent herein is the Additional Director General of DRI and he is referred to in the Column 2. In view of the aforesaid notification, dated 07.03.2002 as amended by subsequent notification dated 16.09.2014, the petitioner will have to be considered as the Principal Commissioner of Customs or Commission ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... a Corrigendum dated 15.02.2018 was issued by the second respondent to the Show cause notice. The issuance of the Show cause notice by the second respondent is questioned in this writ petition. 2.Heard the learned counsel for the writ petitioner and the learned standing counsel appearing for the respondents. 3.The case of the writ petitioner is that the second respondent is not vested with the jurisdiction to issue the impugned Show cause notice under Section 124 of the Customs Act 1962. The learned counsel placed reliance on the decision of the Honourable Calcutta High Court rendered on 10.07.2018 in W.P.No.3336 of 2018. The Honourable Calcutta High Court in the aforesaid decision has held as follows: The last of the notification ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e named in such notifications have not been authorised to discharge any functions under the Act of 1962 by a conferment of authorization by the Board or the Commissioner of Customs exercising powers under Section 2(34) of the Act of 1962. The circular No. 4/99-Cus. dated February 15, 1999 is also not an exercise of powers under Section 2(34) of the Act of 1962. The Circular bearing No. 4/99-Cus. dated February 15, 1999 says that, officers of Directorate of Revenue Intelligence are competent and may issue show-cause notice in cases investigated by them. Although it does allow various officials of the Directorate of Revenue Intelligence to exercise various functions under other statutory provisions of the Act of 1962 since it is not an exerci ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ceedings under Section 124 of the Act of 1962. Unless such officer is entrusted to invoke Section 124 by an appropriate order under Section 2(34), he cannot do so by saying that in discharge of functions entrusted to him under Section 2(34) he has come across materials requiring a proceeding under Section 124. Any other interpretation would render under Section 2(34) otiose. 4.No doubt the case law relied on by the writ petitioner's counsel is on the point. But then this is a decision of the Honourable Calcutta High Court and therefore it is not binding precedent. 5.Section 124 of the Customs Act talks about issuance of Show cause notice before confiscation of goods under Section 122 and before adjudication is done under Section ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nment appoints the officers mentioned in Column (2) of the Table below to be the [Principal Commissioner of Customs of Commissioner of Customs] the officers mentioned in column (3) thereof to be the Additional Commissioners of Joint Commissioners of Customs and Officers mentioned in column (4) thereof to be the Deputy Commissioners or Assistant Commissioners of Customs for the areas mentioned in the corresponding entry in column (1) of the said Table with effect from the date to be notified by the Central Government in the Official Gazette:- TABLE Area of Jurisdiction Designation of the Officers (1) (2) (3) (4) ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... have been notified as proper officer in relation to various sections of the Customs Act. Vide Notification No.17/2002, dated 07.03.2002 as amended by Notification No.82/2014, dated 16.09.2014, the Additional Director General of DRI is appointed as the Commissioner of Customs. Therefore, on reading the notifications together, this Court has to necessarily held that the Additional Director General of DRI is also a proper officer to perform functions in connection with the various provisions of the Customs Act. 11.The learned counsel for the petitioner raised a contention that Show cause notice cannot be issued by one authority and adjudication order passed by another authority. But this contention lacks merit in view of Section 122 of the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
