9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (10) TMI 181X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ant. - Customs Appeal No. 11199 of 2019 - Final Order No. A/11895/2019 - Dated:- 3-10-2019 - MR. RAMESH NAIR, MEMBER (JUDICIAL) Sh. Amit Laddha, Advocate for the Appellant Sh. G. Jha, Authorised representative for the Respondent ORDER The issue involved in the present case is that whether the Ld. Commissioner can extend the time limit for issuance of SCN under Section 110(2) in respect of the goods seized, without following the principles of natural justice such as issuance of SCN and giving hearing to the person from whom the goods were seized. 2. Sh. Amit Laddha, Ld. Counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant, at the outset submits that there is no dispute on the fact that the Ld. Commissioner has not given any SCN before passing an order, for extension of time limit to issue SCN under Section 110(2) of the Customs Act, 1965, he submits that the same issue has been decided by this Tribunal in the case of Rajkamal Industries (P) Ltd. vide Final Order No. A/10953/2019 accordingly, the impugned is not sustainable. 3. Sh. G. Jha, Ld. Superintendent (AR) appearing on behalf of the Revenue reiterates the findings of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 11 . Perusal of the impugned order of the Appellate Tribunal shows that it records findings of fact based on the material which was available on record. It is recorded that the inquiry with respect to live consignment is completed in May-June, 2014 when the reports were received from the laboratory. It is recorded that laboratory reports have been shown to Panch witnesses on 29th May, 2014. The Appellate Tribunal observed that the request for extension of time was very vague. The Appellate Tribunal was conscious of the fact that show cause notice dated 25th May, 2015 has been issued. In short, the Appellate Tribunal has recorded a finding of fact that sufficient cause was not made out by the Respondent. As stated earlier, the Commissioner has not recorded satisfaction in terms of proviso to sub-section (2) of Section 110 and what is held by the Apex Court in paragraph 13 of its decision in the case of I.J. Rao. 12 . Therefore, on merits, we find no reason to interfere with the findings of fact recorded by the Appellate Tribunal that sufficient cause was not made out for extension of time. 13 . Grant of extension of time as provided in the pr ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r has not recorded the reason properly in the order. However the same issue for the period even after the amendment in Section 110 has come up before the Tribunal-Delhi in the case of M/s Swees Gems Jewellery. Vide Final Order No. 50283-50284/2019, the Tribunal after interpreting and discussing the difference in the provision of Section 110(2) before and after amendment came to the conclusion that the amendment is not such that the department is not required to issue SCN. The relevant findings of the Tribunal is as under: 6. We have considered the rival contentions and also perused the case record along with the investigation file submitted before the Bench by ld. AR. In these cases, the issue to be decided is as to whether after the amendment of Section 110(2) of Customs Act by Finance Act, 2018 is there any need for issuance of the Show Cause Notice before the extension is permitted by another six months on the reasonable ground by the Commissioner/adjudicating authority. To resolve the controversy, it will be appropriate to refer the Section 110(2) before the amendment and also after the amendment vide Finance Act, 2018. The same is reproduced as under : ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... wn towards the decision of Sardar Kulwant Singh vs. Collector of Central Excise and Customs, wherein it is held that an order extending period of issue of Show Cause Notice under Section 110(2) and 124 of the Customs Act, 1962, without giving an opportunity of being heard to the affected party is illegal. Further, the requirement of issue of Show Cause Notice issued under Section 124 of the Customs Act in such a case was held to be a must relying upon the various judgments referred as above. Relying on these judgments, we find that the seized goods are required to be returned to the person from whom the seizure has been made of fact of expiry of six month under Section 110 of the Act without extension of time. Regarding the Revenue 8 C/53512-53513/18 contention that with effect of the amendment carried out in Section 110(2) of the Customs Act, the requirement of issuance of Show Cause Notice is dispensed with is without any basis. In fact, we find that after the amendment the Adjudicating Authority has to give the proper reasoning by way of reasoned order after examining the requirement for extension of time period as per sub proviso 2 of Section 110. Question as to whether the per ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... eared from statements of objects in the Finance Act as discussed above. 13. In view of above, we are of the opinion that the impugned order is in violation in this provisions of Section 110 of the Customs Act has held in the various decisions discussed above. We have also seen the note sheet order of the Ld. Commissioner in this case. It is seen from the order that the Commissioner while extending the time period has only gone by the letter of DRI and not put up to him by his office without examining the merits of the such extension and recording his own finding. His finding is only two worded finding which is GC issued dated 26/06/2018 Sd- M Chandra This proves that there is no independent application of mind by the Commissioner (Port) for the extension of Show Cause Notice even by accepting his assertion that the only requirement is that the Principal Commissioner/ Commissioner of Customs made for the reasons to be recorded in writing, extends such period to further period not extending six months and inform the person from whom the goods are seized. We have also considered the submission made by Ld. Ad ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
