Import duty dispute on notice competence and limitation left for merits after writ findings were not binding

A writ appeal concerning import of Clear Float Glass challenged differential duty and interest on the grounds of alleged lack of competence in issuing the show cause notice and limitation. The Kerala High Court rejected both objections, but modified the writ judgment by directing the appellate authority to decide the appeal on merits independently and without being bound by the writ findings. The appeal was thus disposed of with that clarification.

---

---

Issues: Whether the challenge to the adjudication order on the ground of limitation could be examined in writ jurisdiction and whether the appellate authority should decide the statutory appeal independently of the observations made in the writ proceedings.

Analysis: The limitation plea involved a mixed question of law and fact and, therefore, was not fit for determination in the writ petition. The proper course was to pursue the statutory appeal. Since the matter was being relegated to the appellate remedy, any finding on limitation recorded in the writ proceedings should not restrict the appellate authority. The period during which the writ petition was prosecuted was also directed to be excluded while computing limitation.

Conclusion: The limitation issue was left to be decided by the appellate authority on merits, without being influenced by the observations in the writ proceedings, and the time spent in the writ petition was directed to be excluded for limitation purposes.

---