Just a moment...

Top
Help
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Call Us / Help / Feedback

Contact Us At :

E-mail: [email protected]

Call / WhatsApp at: +91 99117 96707

For more information, Check Contact Us

FAQs :

To know Frequently Asked Questions, Check FAQs

Most Asked Video Tutorials :

For more tutorials, Check Video Tutorials

Submit Feedback/Suggestion :

Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
Make Most of Text Search
  1. Checkout this video tutorial: How to search effectively on TaxTMI.
  2. Put words in double quotes for exact word search, eg: "income tax"
  3. Avoid noise words such as : 'and, of, the, a'
  4. Sort by Relevance to get the most relevant document.
  5. Press Enter to add multiple terms/multiple phrases, and then click on Search to Search.
  6. Text Search
  7. The system will try to fetch results that contains ALL your words.
  8. Once you add keywords, you'll see a new 'Search In' filter that makes your results even more precise.
  9. Text Search
Add to...
You have not created any category. Kindly create one to bookmark this item!
Create New Category
Hide
Title :
Description :
❮❮ Hide
Default View
Expand ❯❯
Close ✕
🔎 Case Laws - Adv. Search
TEXT SEARCH:

Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search

Search In:
Main Text + AI Text
  • Main Text
  • Main Text + AI Text
  • AI Text
  • Title Only
  • Head Notes
  • Citation
Party Name: ?
Party name / Appeal No.
Law:
---- All Laws----
  • ---- All Laws----
  • GST
  • Income Tax
  • Benami Property
  • Customs
  • Corporate Laws
  • Securities / SEBI
  • Insolvency & Bankruptcy
  • FEMA
  • Law of Competition
  • PMLA
  • Service Tax
  • Central Excise
  • CST, VAT & Sales Tax
  • Wealth tax
  • Indian Laws
Courts: ?
Select Court or Tribunal
---- All Courts ----
  • ---- All Courts ----
  • Supreme Court - All
  • Supreme Court
  • SC Orders / Highlights
  • High Court
  • Appellate Tribunal
  • Tribunal
  • Appellate authority for Advance Ruling
  • Advance Ruling Authority
  • National Financial Reporting Authority
  • Competition Commission of India
  • ANTI-PROFITEERING AUTHORITY
  • Commission
  • Central Government
  • Board
  • DISTRICT/ SESSIONS Court
  • Commissioner / Appellate Authority
  • Other
Situ: ?
State Name or City name of the Court
Landmark: ?
Where case is referred in other cases
---- All Cases ----
  • ---- All Cases ----
  • Referred in >= 3 Cases
  • Referred in >= 4 Cases
  • Referred in >= 5 Cases
  • Referred in >= 10 Cases
  • Referred in >= 15 Cases
  • Referred in >= 25 Cases
  • Referred in >= 50 Cases
  • Referred in >= 100 Cases
From Date: ?
Date of order
To Date:
TMI Citation:
Year
  • Year
  • 2025
  • 2024
  • 2023
  • 2022
  • 2021
  • 2020
  • 2019
  • 2018
  • 2017
  • 2016
  • 2015
  • 2014
  • 2013
  • 2012
  • 2011
  • 2010
  • 2009
  • 2008
  • 2007
  • 2006
  • 2005
  • 2004
  • 2003
  • 2002
  • 2001
  • 2000
  • 1999
  • 1998
  • 1997
  • 1996
  • 1995
  • 1994
  • 1993
  • 1992
  • 1991
  • 1990
  • 1989
  • 1988
  • 1987
  • 1986
  • 1985
  • 1984
  • 1983
  • 1982
  • 1981
  • 1980
  • 1979
  • 1978
  • 1977
  • 1976
  • 1975
  • 1974
  • 1973
  • 1972
  • 1971
  • 1970
  • 1969
  • 1968
  • 1967
  • 1966
  • 1965
  • 1964
  • 1963
  • 1962
  • 1961
  • 1960
  • 1959
  • 1958
  • 1957
  • 1956
  • 1955
  • 1954
  • 1953
  • 1952
  • 1951
  • 1950
  • 1949
  • 1948
  • 1947
  • 1946
  • 1945
  • 1944
  • 1943
  • 1942
  • 1941
  • 1940
  • 1939
  • 1938
  • 1937
  • 1936
  • 1935
  • 1934
  • 1933
  • 1932
  • 1931
  • 1930
Volume
  • Volume
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 8
  • 9
  • 10
  • 11
  • 12
TMI
Example : 2024 (6) TMI 204
By Case ID:

When case Id is present, search is done only for this

Sort By: ?
Even if Sort by Date is selected, exact match will be shown on the top.
RelevanceDate
    No Records Found
    ❯❯
    MaximizeMaximizeMaximize
    0 / 200
    Expand Note
    Add to Folder

    No Folders have been created

      +

      Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?

      NOTE:

      Case Laws
      Showing Results for :
      Reset Filters
      Results Found:
      AI TextQuick Glance by AIHeadnote
      No Records Found

      Case Laws

      Back

      All Case Laws

      Showing Results for :
      Reset Filters
      Showing
      Records
      ExpandCollapse
        No Records Found

        Case Laws

        Back

        All Case Laws

        Showing Results for : Reset Filters
        Case ID :

        📋
        Contents
        Note

        Note

        -

        Bookmark

        print

        Print

        Login to TaxTMI
        Verification Pending

        The Email Id has not been verified. Click on the link we have sent on

        Didn't receive the mail? Resend Mail

        Don't have an account? Register Here

        <h1>Court quashes Show Cause Notice for delay & procedural lapses. Precedents emphasize timely adjudication & procedural compliance.</h1> <h3>M/s. Shri Ram Agro Chemicals Pvt. Ltd Versus Union of India and others</h3> M/s. Shri Ram Agro Chemicals Pvt. Ltd Versus Union of India and others - TMI Issues Involved:1. Jurisdiction of DRI to issue Show Cause Notice.2. Delay in adjudication of Show Cause Notice.3. Maintainability of writ petition in presence of alternative remedy.4. Retroactive application of amended Section 28(9) and (9A) of the Customs Act, 1962.5. Extension of adjudication period under Section 28(9) and (9A) of the Customs Act, 1962.Issue-wise Detailed Analysis:1. Jurisdiction of DRI to Issue Show Cause Notice:The petitioner challenged the Show Cause Notice dated 17.05.2007 issued by the Directorate of Revenue Intelligence (DRI) on the grounds of jurisdiction. The DRI had initiated an investigation against the petitioner, alleging misdeclaration of the value of goods. The petitioner initially approached the Settlement Commissioner, who rejected the application and relegated the petitioner to the Adjudicating Authority.2. Delay in Adjudication of Show Cause Notice:The petitioner argued that more than twelve years had passed since the issuance of the Show Cause Notice, yet no adjudication order had been passed. The petitioner cited judgments from this Court, including GPI Textile Ltd. Vs. Union of India, Anil Kumar Soni Vs. Union of India, and Harkaran Dass Vedpal Vs. Union of India, to support the contention that the delay in adjudication warranted the quashing of the Show Cause Notice.3. Maintainability of Writ Petition in Presence of Alternative Remedy:The respondents contended that the petitioner had an alternative remedy to file a reply and raise all pleas before the authorities, making the writ petition not maintainable. However, the Court found this preliminary objection devoid of merits, citing the Supreme Court's judgment in State of Punjab Vs. Bhatinda District Co-Op. Milk P. Union Ltd., which held that questions of reasonable period of limitation could not be decided by authorities appointed under the relevant statute. Thus, the Court deemed it appropriate to entertain the writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.4. Retroactive Application of Amended Section 28(9) and (9A) of the Customs Act, 1962:The Court examined the amended provisions of Section 28(9) and (9A) of the Customs Act, 1962, which mandate that authorities must pass an order within one year from the date of the Show Cause Notice, extendable by another year under specific circumstances. The Court found that the amended provisions were retroactive, meaning they applied to pending Show Cause Notices as if issued on 29.03.2018. Since the respondent had not adjudicated the Show Cause Notice within the stipulated period, the notice was deemed to have lapsed.5. Extension of Adjudication Period under Section 28(9) and (9A) of the Customs Act, 1962:The respondents claimed that the period for adjudication had been extended by an officer senior in rank to the proper officer. However, the Court found no evidence of such an extension order being passed or communicated to the petitioner. The Court emphasized that any extension of the adjudication period must be reasoned, involve an opportunity of hearing, and be communicated to the concerned party. The absence of these procedural safeguards rendered the respondents' contention invalid.Conclusion:The Court concluded that the Show Cause Notice dated 17.05.2007 was quashed due to the inordinate delay in adjudication and the failure to comply with the procedural requirements for extending the adjudication period. The judgment was based on the principles established in previous rulings, including GPI Textile Ltd. Vs. Union of India and Harkaran Dass Vedpal Vs. Union of India.

        Topics

        ActsIncome Tax
        No Records Found