Court affirms DRI's jurisdiction to issue Notice under Customs Act. Petitioner's challenge dismissed. Respond within 2 weeks.

The court upheld the jurisdiction of the Joint Director, DRI, to issue the Show-Cause Notice under Section 124 of the Customs Act, 1962. The petitioner's challenge against the Notice on the grounds of authority was dismissed. The petitioner was granted two weeks to respond to the notice before the matter would be forwarded to the Adjudicating Authority as per the Customs Act.

---

---

Issues:
1. Jurisdiction of the Joint Director, DRI to issue Show-Cause Notice under Section 124 of the Customs Act, 1962.

Detailed Analysis:
The case involved the seizure of gold biscuits and currency from a vehicle by the Directorate of Revenue Intelligence (DRI). The Joint Director, DRI issued a Show-Cause Notice under Section 124 of the Customs Act, 1962, to the petitioners. The petitioner challenged the Notice, contending that it was issued by the wrong authority, as per Notifications No.25/2022 and No.26/2022. The petitioner argued that only Deputy Commissioner or Assistant Commissioner of Customs were designated as proper officers to issue such notices, not the Joint Director, DRI.

The petitioner's counsel relied on Sections 2(34), 5, and 6 of the Customs Act, 1962, which define the "proper officer" and outline the powers of customs officers. The counsel pointed out that Notifications No.25/2022 and No.26/2022 specified the officers authorized to issue notices under Section 124. The petitioner argued that the Joint Director, DRI, did not fall within the designated officers as per the notifications, hence the Notice should be set aside.

On the other hand, the respondents contended that the Joint Director, DRI, being equivalent to a Joint Commissioner of Customs, had the authority to issue the Show-Cause Notice under Section 124. They argued that the rank of the officer issuing the notice was above that of an Assistant Commissioner of Customs, as required by the section.

The Court examined the relevant provisions of the Customs Act, 1962, particularly Sections 2(34), 5, and 6, which define the role of proper officers and the powers conferred upon them. The Court also reviewed Notifications No.25/2022 and No.26/2022 issued by the Central Board of Indirect Taxes & Customs, which designated officers authorized to issue notices under Section 124.

The Court noted that Notification No.25/2022 invested the Joint Director, DRI, with the powers of a Joint Commissioner of Customs, while Notification No.26/2022 assigned Deputy Commissioner or Assistant Commissioner of Customs as proper officers for issuing such notices. The Court found that the Joint Director, DRI, being above the rank of Deputy Commissioner or Assistant Commissioner, was indeed a proper officer to issue the Show-Cause Notice under Section 124.

In conclusion, the Court upheld the jurisdiction of the Joint Director, DRI, to issue the Show-Cause Notice and dismissed the writ petition. The petitioner was granted the opportunity to respond to the notice within two weeks, following which the matter would be transmitted to the Adjudicating Authority under the Customs Act, 1962.

---