2018 (4) TMI 4

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... of DRI/SIB/Commissioner of Customs(Prev.). 2. During the course of hearing the ld.AR submitted that these proceedings were pertaining to notices issued prior to April, 2011. 3. I note that the powers of officers working in these organizations to issue notice under Customs Act, 1962 as proper officers has been subject matter of decision by various High Courts. When similar matters came up for decision before this Tribunal, the Tribunal in the case of M/s.HR Electronics, M/s.Laxmi Radios v. Commissioner of Customs, New Delhi(I &G) - 2017-TIOL-2328-CESTAT-DELHI noting the difference of opinion among various High Courts and the pendency of the issue before the Hon'ble Supreme Court passed following Order :- "5. From the record, it appears ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ious DRI officers with retrospective effect. 9. 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 came up before the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of Mangali Impex Vs. Union of India [2016 335 ELT 605 Del] = 2016-TIOL- 877- HC-DEL-CUS, 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 issue the SCN for the period prior to 8.4.11. Thus, it is seen that the said order of the Hon'ble Delhi High Court is in favour of the assessee and against the Revenue. 10. However, it is further noticed that the said issue was also the subject matter of Hon'bl....