TaxTMI Login
🎉 Festive Offer: Flat 15% off on all plans! →⚡ Don’t Miss Out: Limited-Time Offer →
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>Supreme Court Defines Proper Officer Jurisdiction for Customs Act Notices</h1> <h3>Vikram Jain, Dr. Y. Siva Arul Durai Versus The Chief Commissioner of Customs, The Commissioner of Customs (Chennai-IV)</h3> The Supreme Court clarified the jurisdiction of proper officers for notices under the Customs Act in response to writ petitions challenging a record of ... Jurisdiction - power of DRI to issue SCN - proper officer for the purpose of issuance of notices under Section 28 of the Customs Act, 1962 or not - HELD THAT:- The Show Cause Notices in these proceedings are dated 16.09.2013. The petitioners had earlier filed W.P.Nos.28574 & 28575 of 2013. These writ petitions were inspired earlier from the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS VERSUS SAYED ALI [2011 (2) TMI 5 - SUPREME COURT] which view has been now confirmed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in M/S CANON INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED VERSUS COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS [2021 (3) TMI 384 - SUPREME COURT] - it was held clearly in Canon India case that the Officers of the Directorate of Revenue Intelligence are not proper officers for the purpose of notices under Section 112 of the Customs Act, 1962. These writ petitions is disposed off without expressing any opinion on merits of the case by directing the petitioners to file appropriate written submission before the respondents - petition disposed off. Issues:Challenging record of physical hearing, direction for passing appropriate orders on communication, jurisdiction of proper officer for notices under Customs Act, disposal without expressing opinion on merits, direction to file written submissions, timeline for passing orders, consideration of Covid-19 protocols.Analysis:The judgment pertains to two writ petitions challenging a record of physical hearing and seeking directions for passing appropriate orders on a communication. The petitions arose from Show Cause Notices issued by the Directorate of Revenue Intelligence. Previous writ petitions related to similar issues were disposed of in 2020. The Supreme Court clarified the position of law regarding the proper officer for notices under the Customs Act. The petitioners argued that the Directorate of Revenue Intelligence officers are not proper officers for such notices. The court noted the absence of petitioners' counsel but considered their affidavit and arguments presented by the Senior Standing Counsel and other counsel.The Show Cause Notices in question were dated 16.09.2013, with earlier writ petitions inspired by a previous Supreme Court decision. The court acknowledged the clarity provided by the Supreme Court's recent ruling in Canon India Private Limited case and decided to dispose of the writ petitions without expressing an opinion on the merits. The petitioners were directed to submit written arguments before the respondents, leveraging the Supreme Court's decision to seek appropriate orders in line with the law.Given the prolonged dispute dating back to 2015 and the petitioners' return to court in 2021, the court instructed the respondents to pass orders within three months, emphasizing compliance with the law and the Supreme Court's decision. The judgment highlighted the need for the petitioners to be heard in accordance with Covid-19 protocols. Ultimately, the writ petitions were disposed of with the specified directions, without imposing any costs. The connected Writ Miscellaneous Petitions were also closed as a consequence of this judgment.
TaxTMI 
