2009 (12) TMI 439

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....arned senior advocate Mr.Kamal B. Trivedi appearing for the petitioner has inconvenience as he has other matter fixed at 02.00 PM. 2. The matter is filed in the year 2008. Reply is also filed. The matter has remained pending at admission stage right from 18th January 2008. We are on 7th December 2009, i.e. almost for two years. From the reply it is not clear as to under which provision, the authorities have issued Show Cause Notice. 3. Heard learned senior advocate Mr. Trivedi for the petitioner. The learned senior advocate for the petitioner invited attention of the Court to the "Statement of Objects and Reasons" to the Special Economic Zones Act, 2005 ('SEZ Act' for brevity). The learned senior advocate for the petitioner also invit....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... Cause Notice. 5. The learned senior advocate for the petitioner relied upon a decision of the Hon'ble the Apex court in the matter of Whirlpool Corporation Vs. Registrar of Trade Marks, Mumbai and others, reported in A.I.R. 1999 SC 22. The learned senior advocate for the petitioner invited attention of the Court to paras 10 and 11 and thereafter, paras 17 to 21. The Court is of the opinion that the present authority issuing Show Cause Notice figures nowhere in the provisions of the SEZ Act. Therefore, prima facie, the Court is of the opinion that the authority has issued the Show Cause Notice without there being jurisdiction for issuance of such notice. The matter requires closer scrutiny. Hence RULE. Ad interim relief granted earlier t....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... has been issued for adjudication of cases pertaining to Export Processing Zone (EPZ) and the same would also apply to SEZ units till a detailed regulation is framed under the SEZ Act in this regard and till sections 20, 21 and 22 of the Act are made applicable. The above mentioned Notification No.15/ 2002-Cus (N.T.) read with Notification No.87/ 2006-Cus (N.T.) are self explanatory with regard to the power of adjudication by the Commissioner of Customs, Kandla. It is submitted that although the Development Commissioner is vested with administrative control of the units of SEZ, he cannot adjudicate and prosecute for the offences committed by the units under the Customs Act, 1962. It is only the Commissioner of Customs, Kandla who can adjudi....