TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
When case Id is present, search is done only for this
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>Court quashes confiscation order, directs show cause notice issuance</h1> <h3>M/s. GEO ASSOCIATES Versus THE COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS, DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS (IMPORTS), ERNAKULAM</h3> The court quashed the Ext.P7 order for confiscation of a dialysis machine and directed the 2nd respondent to issue a show cause notice to the petitioner, ... Principles of natural justice - no SCN issued - Confiscation - penalty - imported used dialysis machine - prohibited item or not - alleged violation of Hazardous and Other Wastes (Management and Transboundary Movement) Rules, 2016 - HELD THAT:- The respondents would submit that a show cause notice can be issued to the petitioner and the matter re-adjudicated after hearing the petitioner. Writ Petition disposed off by quashing Ext.P7 order and directing the 2nd respondent to issue a show cause notice to the petitioner outlining the proposals for confiscation and the grounds therefor, and then proceed to adjudicate the matter afresh. Petition allowed by way of remand. Issues: Challenge against Ext.P7 order - Confiscation of imported dialysis machine under Hazardous and Other Wastes Rules, 2016 - Imposition of penalty under Customs Act - Non-compliance with rules of natural justice - Show cause notice not issued.The judgment addresses the challenge in a Writ Petition against Ext.P7 order passed by the 2nd respondent, involving the confiscation of a used dialysis machine imported by the petitioner under the Hazardous and Other Wastes (Management and Transboundary Movement) Rules, 2016. Additionally, a penalty was imposed on the petitioner under Section 112 of the Customs Act. The petitioner's grievance primarily revolves around the lack of a show cause notice before the issuance of Ext.P7 order, leading to a violation of the rules of natural justice. The petitioner argues that without being informed of the grounds for the proposed action, the impugned order is tainted by procedural irregularities.The judgment highlights the contention of the learned Standing Counsel for the respondents, who acknowledges the possibility of issuing a show cause notice to the petitioner for a re-adjudication of the matter after affording the petitioner a hearing. In response to this submission, the judgment disposes of the Writ Petition by quashing Ext.P7 order and directing the 2nd respondent to issue a show cause notice to the petitioner, clearly outlining the proposals for confiscation and the grounds thereof. Subsequently, the 2nd respondent is instructed to proceed with a fresh adjudication after hearing the petitioner. Notably, in the fresh proceedings, the petitioner is barred from raising any objections regarding the limitation concerning the issuance of the show cause notice.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
