https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=388206 The court allowed the appeals, set aside the impugned judgment and order, and dismissed all the writ applications. It held that the Additional Director General was validly appointed and had the jurisdiction and power to issue the show-cause notice under Section 124 of the Customs Act, 1962. The court found that the show-cause notice did not exhibit any pre-disposition of mind and was issued under proper authority. The respondents' arguments were rejected, emphasizing the presumption that a government officer acting with statutory authority is doing so regularly. en-us Tue, 05 Nov 2019 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 28 Apr 2022 11:44:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=388206 The court allowed the appeals, set aside the impugned judgment and order, and dismissed all the writ applications. It held that the Additional Director General was validly appointed and had the jurisdiction and power to issue the show-cause notice under Section 124 of the Customs Act, 1962. The court found that the show-cause notice did not exhibit any pre-disposition of mind and was issued under proper authority. The respondents' arguments were rejected, emphasizing the presumption that a government officer acting with statutory authority is doing so regularly. Case-Laws Customs Tue, 05 Nov 2019 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=388206