TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
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>DRI show cause notice jurisdiction challenge resolved under Section 28 Customs Act following Canon-II directions</h1> The Delhi HC disposed of a petition challenging a show cause notice dated 1st May, 2019 issued by DRI Mumbai Zonal Unit regarding jurisdiction of DRI ... Jurisdiction of Directorate of Revenue Intelligence (DRI) officials under Section 28 of the Customs Act, 1962 to issue SCN - proper officer or not - HELD THAT:- In the present petition, the show cause notice which is under challenge is dated 1st May, 2019 issued by the DRI, Mumbai Zonal Unit. This would be covered by directions given in paragraph 168 (vi) (a) of the Canon-II [2024 (11) TMI 391 - SUPREME COURT (LB)], wherein the adjudication of the show cause notice is to be restored to the adjudicating authority. The proceedings in the show cause notice under challenge dated 1st May, 2019 shall now proceed before the appropriate adjudicating authority in accordance with law. Petition disposed off. ISSUES PRESENTED and CONSIDEREDThe core legal issue considered in this judgment is the jurisdiction of the Directorate of Revenue Intelligence (DRI) officials to issue show cause notices and pass adjudication orders under Section 28 of the Customs Act, 1962. The question arises from the Supreme Court's decision in Canon India Pvt. Ltd. v. Commissioner of Customs, which initially held that DRI officials were not 'proper officers' for the purposes of Section 28. This judgment examines whether the DRI has the authority to issue such notices and whether the proceedings initiated by them are valid.ISSUE-WISE DETAILED ANALYSISRelevant Legal Framework and PrecedentsThe legal framework revolves around Section 28 of the Customs Act, 1962, which deals with the recovery of duties not levied or paid. The Supreme Court's decision in Canon India Pvt. Ltd. initially concluded that DRI officials were not proper officers under this section, based on the statutory interpretation that only officers who conducted the original assessment could undertake reassessment.Court's Interpretation and ReasoningThe Court's interpretation in the present judgment is influenced by the Supreme Court's subsequent review decision, which clarified that DRI officers were indeed appointed as officers of customs through specific notifications and circulars. The review decision pointed out that these notifications and circulars were not considered in the original Canon India judgment, leading to an incorrect conclusion about the jurisdiction of DRI officers.Key Evidence and FindingsThe key evidence includes Notification No. 19/90 and Notification No. 17/2002, which appointed DRI officers as customs officers, and Circular No. 4/99, which empowered them to issue show cause notices under Section 28. The Supreme Court's review decision emphasized these documents to validate the jurisdiction of DRI officers.Application of Law to FactsIn applying the law to the facts, the Court determined that the show cause notice dated 1st May 2019, issued by the DRI Mumbai Zonal Unit, falls within the scope of the Supreme Court's review decision. As per the directions in paragraph 168 (vi) (a) of the Canon-II judgment, the adjudication of this notice is to be restored to the appropriate authority.Treatment of Competing ArgumentsThe competing argument that DRI officials lacked jurisdiction was addressed by the Supreme Court's review decision, which clarified that the original judgment failed to consider relevant notifications and circulars. The review decision effectively overruled the jurisdictional challenge by establishing that DRI officers are proper officers under Section 28.ConclusionsThe conclusion reached is that the proceedings initiated by the DRI, including the show cause notice under challenge, are valid and should proceed before the appropriate adjudicating authority. The petitioner is given 60 days to respond to the show cause notice, with the provision for a personal hearing.SIGNIFICANT HOLDINGSCore Principles EstablishedThe significant holding is that DRI officers are proper officers for the purposes of Section 28 of the Customs Act, 1962, and are competent to issue show cause notices. This is based on the Supreme Court's review decision, which took into account the statutory scheme and relevant notifications that were overlooked in the original Canon India judgment.Final Determinations on Each IssueThe final determination is that the show cause notice dated 1st May 2019, issued by the DRI, is valid and should be adjudicated by the appropriate authority. The petitioner is afforded an opportunity to file a reply and be heard before a decision is made on the notice.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
