2017 (9) TMI 441 - AT - Customs

Tribunal remands case, aligns with High Court precedent, maintains status quo pending final decision.

The Tribunal set aside the impugned order and remanded the matter to the original adjudicating authority following the precedent set by the Hon'ble High ... Jurisdiction - power of DRI to issue SCN - Held that: - the notice issued by the DRI who was not a competent authority as per the ratio laid down in the case of Mangali Impex Ltd. Vs. UOI [2016 (5) TMI 225 - DELHI HIGH COURT] - In this connection, we note that similar issues have been dealt with in various cases by the Tribunal recently. It is held that the matters have to be remanded back to the original authority for a decision - appeal allowed by way of remand. Issues: Jurisdiction of DRI officers to issue show cause notices under the Customs Act.Analysis:1. The issue at hand pertains to the jurisdiction of the Directorate of Revenue Intelligence (DRI) officers to issue show cause notices under the Customs Act. The appellant contended that DRI officers were not proper officers as per the Customs Act, citing the Supreme Court decision in the case of Commissioner of Customs vs. Sayed Ali.2. The Hon'ble Supreme Court's decision prompted an amendment to section 28 of the Customs Act, 1962, through the Finance Act, 2011, effective from 08.04.2011. Subsequently, Notification No. 44/2011-Cus (NT) was issued, designating the Additional Director General, DRI as a proper officer for the purpose of Section 28 of the Act from 06/07/2011 onwards.3. A subsequent amendment under Section 28 of the Customs (Amendment and Validation) Act, 2011, on 16/09/2011, retroactively assigned proper officer functions to various DRI officers. However, conflicting views emerged from different High Courts, leading the matter to the Hon'ble Supreme Court, which stayed the Delhi High Court's judgment.4. Notably, the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi in another case granted liberty to review the challenge based on the Supreme Court's decision in the Mangali Impex Ltd. case. Following this precedent and the totality of circumstances, the Tribunal set aside the impugned order and remanded the matter to the original adjudicating authority.5. The Tribunal's decision aligned with the previous Tribunal ruling, remanding the matter for a fresh decision. The agreement of the Revenue's representative to this course of action led to the disposal of the appeal accordingly, maintaining the status quo until a final decision is reached.