https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=47034 The article explains that an adjudicating authority is not deprived of jurisdiction merely because the appellate scheme provides an appeal from a Joint Director General of Foreign Trade to an Additional Director General of Foreign Trade, where no prejudice is shown. It also states that penalty under Section 4-I(1)(a) of the Import and Export (Control) Act, 1947 is sustainable when the show-cause notice specifically alleges utilisation of imported goods contrary to licence conditions and failure to meet export obligations. A factual plea that the goods remained with the importer cannot be raised for the first time in writ proceedings. The article further notes that the quantum of penalty will not ordinarily be disturbed in writ jurisdiction if it lies within the statutory ceiling. en-us Fri, 30 May 2003 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 26 Jul 2010 15:30:21 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=47034 The article explains that an adjudicating authority is not deprived of jurisdiction merely because the appellate scheme provides an appeal from a Joint Director General of Foreign Trade to an Additional Director General of Foreign Trade, where no prejudice is shown. It also states that penalty under Section 4-I(1)(a) of the Import and Export (Control) Act, 1947 is sustainable when the show-cause notice specifically alleges utilisation of imported goods contrary to licence conditions and failure to meet export obligations. A factual plea that the goods remained with the importer cannot be raised for the first time in writ proceedings. The article further notes that the quantum of penalty will not ordinarily be disturbed in writ jurisdiction if it lies within the statutory ceiling. Case-Laws Customs Fri, 30 May 2003 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=47034