Customs duty notice quashed due to lengthy delays, petitioner successful in challenge

The court quashed the show cause notice for customs duty recovery due to prolonged delays in finalizing proceedings under Section 28 of the Customs Act, 1962. The petitioner's challenge to the notice's issuance in 2009 without resolution for over twelve years was upheld. The court found the revenue's explanations for the delay inadequate and ruled in favor of the petitioner, allowing the writ petition without costs and closing the related miscellaneous petition.

---

---

Issues:
Challenge to show cause notice for customs duty recovery based on delay in finalizing proceedings under Section 28 of the Customs Act, 1962.

Analysis:
The petitioner contested a show cause notice dated Nil-8-2009 demanding customs duty for a Bill of Entry filed on 25.08.2009. The factual details were deemed irrelevant to the legal issue at hand. The petitioner responded on 05.09.2009, explaining the situation and referencing a prior personal hearing on 13.04.2009 where clarifying documents were submitted.

Subsequently, a letter on 18.11.2016 instructed the petitioner to pay the demand from the earlier notice and attend a personal hearing on 28.11.2016. The petitioner complied, reiterating their defense in a letter dated 15.12.2016. Despite requests to reverse an alert on the Customs portal and close the 2009 proceedings, no action was taken by the respondent, prompting the filing of the present writ petition seeking alert removal.

In a related writ petition disposed of earlier, the alert reversal was confirmed based on the submission of Mr. Pramod Kumar Chopda. The primary challenge to the show cause notice was its issuance on 14.05.2009 and the prolonged pending status without finalizing proceedings under Section 28 of the Customs Act, 1962.

Section 28(9)(a) mandates determining duty and interest within six months of the notice, a timeline that had elapsed. While Section 28(9)(b) imposes a one-year limit, it was argued that this provision was not applicable at the notice's issuance. The revenue's defense failed to justify the extended delay of over twelve years, with no mention of transferring the issue to the call book or changes in officers being acceptable reasons.

Consequently, the court quashed the show cause notice and allowed the writ petition, with no costs incurred. The connected miscellaneous petition was closed as a result of the judgment.

---