Supreme Court Defines Proper Officer Jurisdiction for Customs Act Notices

The Supreme Court clarified the jurisdiction of proper officers for notices under the Customs Act in response to writ petitions challenging a record of physical hearing and seeking appropriate orders on communication related to Show Cause Notices issued by the Directorate of Revenue Intelligence. The Court disposed of the petitions without expressing an opinion on the merits, directing the petitioners to file written submissions. Orders were mandated to be passed within three months, emphasizing compliance with the law and Covid-19 protocols, without imposing costs.

---

---

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.

---