https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=448075 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. en-us Tue, 19 Dec 2023 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 11 Jan 2024 17:18:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=448075 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. Case-Laws Customs Tue, 19 Dec 2023 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=448075