2017 (6) TMI 662

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... appellant against the order Nos.05/MDS/2007 dated 13.02.2007, 03/MDS/2007 dated 06.02.2007, 04/MDS/2007 dated 06.02.2007 and 05/MDS/2007 dated 29.01.2007. The condition of pre-deposit is waived and appeals are admitted. 2. Both the sides agree that the proceedings are initiated by notice issued by officers of DRI. 3. During the course of arguments, the appellant's counsel has raised the preliminary plea that the show cause notice in the instant case was issued by the Directorate of Revenue Intelligence (DRI). The Hon'ble High Court of Delhi in the case of Mangli Impex Vs. UOI dated 03.05.2016 has observed that the DRI is not competent to issue the show cause notices. Hence, the request is being made to set aside the present proceedings w....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... the Customs Acts. Hence, from 06.07.2011 ADG-DRI has been empowered to issue demand notice under Section 28. 9. Subsequently, sub-section 11 was inserted under section 28 of the Customs (Amendment and Validation) Act, 2011 dated 16.09.2011, assigning the functions of proper officers to various DRI officers with retrospective effect. 10. Later on, i.e. for the period subsequent to the amendment, the matter i.e. the DRI officers having the proper jurisdiction to issue the SCN or not had come up before the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of Mangali Impex Vs. Union of India [2016 335 ELT 605 Del.], and the High Court inter alia, held that even the new inserted section 28(11) does not empower either the officers of DRI or the DGCEI to is....