9911796707
TMI Blog2022 (1) TMI 135X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 4) read with Section 2(34) of the Customs Act, 1962. Penalties were imposed under section 114, 114A and 114 AA of Customs Act - in the impugned order and the SCN for confiscation of goods or imposition of penalties is issued under section 124 of the Customs and not under Section 28 - HELD THAT:- The SCN under Section 124 need not be issued by the proper officer . However, in the present case the basis for the proposed confiscation of goods and imposition of penalties in the SCN has been the re- assessment of the goods and demand of the duty under Section 28(4). The basis for re-assessment being unsustainable in view of Canon India, the proposals for confiscation and of goods and imposition of penalties cannot service either. Appea ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... under Section 114 A of the Customs Act, 1962. (iv) I refrain from imposing penalty on Shri Rajendra Rawat, Chief Manager (Marketing), Bullion Division. M/s State Trading Corporation of India Limited, Jawahar Vyapar Bhavan Tolstoy Marg, New Delhi-110001 under Section 114 AA of the Customs Act, 1962. (v) I confiscate the articles of jewellery already exported, as detailed in worksheet-A1 to the Show Cause Notice , totally valued at ₹ 37,10,75,770/-(Rupees Thirty Seven Crore Ten Lakh Seventy Five Thousand Seven Hundred and Seventy Only) under section 113 (d) and 113(i) of the customs act, 1962. Since, the goods have already been cleared were never seized, therefore, I refrain myself from imposing any redemption fine Section 125( ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... h interest and imposing penalty under section 114A upon M/s Venus Industries and penalty under section 114AA upon Arun Kumar Agarwal. It has been held by the Hon ble Supreme Court in Canon India that the officers of DRI are not proper officers to issue a show cause notice demanding duty under section 28(4). Therefore, the SCN itself is issued without authority of law and the consequential impugned order in these two appeals cannot be sustained. He, therefore, prays that both appeals may be allowed and the impugned order may be set aside. 4. Learned Departmental Representative supports the impugned order. 5. We have considered the arguments in these two appeals and perused the records. We find that in the present case the show cause ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e of Guvidivan [ Givaudan India Pvt Ltd. vs Principal Commissioner of Customs, Bangalore (Writ Petition no. 10773/2018 and 4628/2018) ] and allowed the writ petition and quashed the impugned order as the show cause notice issued by officer of DRI demanding duty under section 28. The Madurai Bench of Madras High Court in the case of Quantum coal [ Quantum Coal Energy (P) Ltd. vs The Commissioner (Writ Petition (MD) 10186 10817/2014) ], likewise, followed Cannon India Ltd. and quashed the impugned order passed by the Commissioner since the Show Cause Notice was issued by the DRI. In view of above we find that the present case and the impugned order cannot be sustained because the show cause notice was issued by the ADG DRI who is not the comp ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
