Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether a penalty could be imposed on a director when no separate show cause notice was issued to him and the notice was addressed only to the company.
Analysis: Section 4L of the Imports and Exports (Control) Act, 1947 required a written notice to the owner or other person concerned before any adjudication imposing penalty. The notice issued here was only to the company, did not specifically address the petitioner, and did not set out specific acts of omission or commission attributed to him. The requirement of notice was treated as mandatory and substantive, not a mere procedural formality. Since the petitioner was never directly put on notice or afforded an opportunity to meet the proposed penalty, the adjudication suffered from a breach of natural justice and the later appellate hearing could not cure the defect.
Conclusion: The penalty imposed on the petitioner could not be sustained and the impugned orders were liable to be set aside to that extent.
Final Conclusion: The writ petition succeeded in part, with the penalty on the petitioner quashed while no other relief was granted.
Ratio Decidendi: Where the statute makes prior written notice to the person concerned a condition precedent to penalty, failure to issue such notice renders the penalty order unsustainable for violation of mandatory natural justice requirements.