9911796707
TMI Blog2021 (3) TMI 1034X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... irector General of DRI. The Hon'ble Supreme Court had held that he cannot be termed as the proper officer . Since the entire proceedings were initiated by an authority who lacked the jurisdiction, applying the aforesaid decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court the order impugned in these writ petitions is quashed. Petition allowed - decided in favor of petitioner. - W.P.(MD)Nos.10186 & 10187 of 2014 And M.P.(MD)Nos.1 & 1 of 2014 - - - Dated:- 16-3-2021 - Honourable Mr.Justice G.R.Swaminathan For the Petitioner : P.Vijayakumar For the Respondent : Mr.S.Ragaventhre, Junior Panel Standing Counsel COMMON ORDER Heard the learned counsel appearing for the writ petitioners and the learned Standing counsel appearing ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... calling upon the petitioner to show cause as to why action should not be taken for misrepresentation of Bituminous coal as steam coal. The petitioner submitted their reply. Rejecting the stand taken by the petitioner, the impugned order dated 13.03.2014 came to be passed levying duty and penalty on the importer as well as the Managing Director of the importer company. Questioning the same, these writ petitions have been filed. 5. The respondent has filed a detailed counter affidavit and he wants this Court to sustain the impugned order. The learned Standing counsel took me through the contents set out therein. 6. When the matter was taken up for hearing, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the issue is no ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... cleared the goods i.e. the Deputy Commissioner Appraisal Group. Indeed, this must be so because no fiscal statute has been shown to us where the power to re-open assessment or recover duties which have escaped assessment has been conferred on an officer other than the officer of the rank of the officer who initially took the decision to assess the goods. 13. Where the statute confers the same power to perform an act on different officers, as in this case, the two officers, especially when they belong to different departments, cannot exercise their powers in the same case. Where one officer has exercised his powers of assessment, the power to order re-assessment must also be exercised by the same officer or his successor and not by anoth ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... or Revisional Authority. It is, therefore, clear to us that the Additional Director General of DRI was not the proper officer to exercise the power under Section 28(4) and the initiation of the recovery proceedings in the present case is without any jurisdiction and liable to be set aside. 7. In the case also, the show cause notice was issued by the Additional Director General of DRI. The Hon'ble Supreme Court had held that he cannot be termed as the proper officer . Since the entire proceedings were initiated by an authority who lacked the jurisdiction, applying the aforesaid decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court the order impugned in these writ petitions is quashed. The writ petitions are allowed. No costs. Consequently, con ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
