Customs order set aside for lack of notice, remanded for new hearing.

The Court set aside the order issued by the Deputy Commissioner of Customs for exceeding remand directions from the Tribunal without proper notice to the petitioner. The matter was remanded back to the assessing officer with instructions for a new hearing where the petitioner could present their case and relevant documents. The Writ Petition was allowed, and no costs were imposed, while the connected Miscellaneous Petition was closed.

---

---

Issues:
Challenging an order issued by the Deputy Commissioner of Customs without prior notice and following remand directions from the Tribunal.

Analysis:
The Writ Petition was filed by M/s.Carlisle Trading & Manufacturing (India) Pvt. Ltd., challenging the order dated 10.03.2015 issued by the Deputy Commissioner of Customs, Chennai. The petitioner contended that the order was passed without issuing any notice regarding the proposal to enhance the value, contrary to the remand directions from the Tribunal. The petitioner's counsel argued that the respondent exceeded the Tribunal's directions by re-determining the value and adding a loading of 19.70% without proper notice. The counsel emphasized that the notice for enhancement should have been given to the petitioner. On the other hand, the respondent's counsel argued that there was no provision requiring notice and that the petitioner had the opportunity for a personal hearing before the respondent. The respondent justified the order and suggested that the petitioner could appeal if aggrieved.

The Court found no merit in the respondent's contentions. Referring to the previous order dated 03.06.2013, the Court noted that the Tribunal had remanded the matter back to the adjudicating authority with clear directions to provide a proper opportunity for hearing before making a decision. The Court emphasized that the respondent, by rejecting the declared value and ordering a re-determination with a higher loading percentage, acted beyond the Tribunal's directions without issuing specific notice for enhancement. Therefore, the Court set aside the impugned order and remanded the matter back to the assessing officer, directing the petitioner to treat the order as notice and present their case. The assessing officer was instructed to issue a notice for a hearing, allowing the petitioner to submit any relevant documents during the hearing.

In conclusion, the Writ Petition was allowed, and no costs were imposed. The connected Miscellaneous Petition was closed.

---