Second show cause notice under Section 28(4) Customs Act valid despite pending first notice proceedings

The AP HC dismissed a writ petition challenging a second show cause notice issued under Section 28(4) read with Section 124 of the Customs Act, 1962. The petitioner argued the second notice was invalid due to same cause of action and pendency of proceedings from the first notice. The court held that under Section 28(9), the determination period under clause (b) is extendable for one year by a senior officer. Since the extended period had not expired and could still be extended if needed, the second proviso relied upon by petitioner would only apply after expiry of the extended period. No valid grounds existed to challenge the show cause notice.

---

---

Issues involved:
The challenge in the present writ petition is to the show-cause notice issued under Section 28(4) read with Section 124 of the Customs Act, 1962.

Judgment Details:
The petitioner argued that the second show-cause notice could not be issued on the same cause of action as the first notice, citing a Supreme Court case. However, the second notice included new bill amounts. The respondents contended that the second notice was valid as more bills were added and the competent authority issued it. The court noted that the second notice was issued by the competent authority and included additional bill amounts.

In a previous case, the Supreme Court held that a second show-cause notice could not be issued on the same cause of action after final adjudication. In the present case, there was no final adjudication on the first notice, making it distinguishable. The petitioner argued that the period for determining duty or interest had expired from the first notice, but the court found that the period under the Act was extendable.

The court found no valid ground to entertain the writ petition challenging the show-cause notice. The petitioner was given the option to file a reply before the authority concerned as the proceedings were still pending. The writ petition was dismissed with no order as to costs, and any pending miscellaneous petitions were also closed.

---