TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2025 (8) TMI 660
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... amended by Notification No.69/2000.Cus(NT) is valid in light of the judgment rendered by the Tribunal in the instant case with reference to jurisdiction in absence of specification about the area and territory in the above referred Notification and corrigendum?" 2. Notices had been issued to R1 and R2 (collectively as 'assessee's) and the cause list reflects that as far as R1 (vacated), is concerned, the notice has been returned. Mr.Sai Srujan Tyai, learned Senior Standing Counsel appears for the Customs Department and Mr.M.A.Arshad, for Mr.M.Abdul Razack, for R2. 3. A show cause notice was issued to R1 and R2 by the Additional Director General of Central Excise Intelligence ('ADGCEI'), Directorate General of Central Excise Intelligence, Department of Revenue, alleging evasion of customs duty on used photocopier components and subassemblies that had been imported by Wintech under two Bills of Entry dated 10.06.2002 and 18.10.2002. The ADGCEI thus proposed to confiscate the goods seized and raised a demand of duty on the goods imported, under the provisions of the Customs Act, 1962. 4. Jurisdiction had been assumed by the ADGCEI invoking powers under Notification No.31/200....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....officer with the requisite powers under the Act can issue a show cause notice. 10. The Tribunal has accepted the argument of Respondents 1 and 2, to the effect that, the ADGCEI is not a 'proper officer' as defined under Section 2(34) of the Customs Act and after amendment of Section 4 of the Customs Act, with effect from 11.05.2002, unless the Central Board of Excise and Customs issued a specific notification, the ADGCEI could not act as a customs officer to issue a show cause notice. 11. The subject Notification, Notification No.31/2000-Cus. (NT) dated 09.05.2000 as amended by Notification No.69/2000-Cus. (NT) dated 23.11.2000 is extracted below: Appointment of Anti Evasion Officers with powers of Customs Officers In exercise of the powers conferred by sub-section (1) of section 4 of the Customs Act, 1962 (52 of 1962), the Central Government hereby appoints the officers of the Directorate General of Central Excise Intelligence specified in column (2)of the Table below as the officers of customs and invests them all the powers exercisable by an officer of customs or the rank specified in the corresponding entry in the column (3) of the said Table, su....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....itled Powers of Officers of Customs, reads as follows:- '(1) Subject to such conditions and limitations as the Board may impose, an officer of customs may exercise the powers and discharge the duties conferred or imposed on him under this Act. (1-A) Without prejudice to the provisions contained in sub-section (1), the Board may, by notification, assign such functions as it may deem fit, to an officer of customs, who shall be the proper officer in relation to such functions. (1B) Within their jurisdiction assigned by the Board, the Principal Commissioner of Customs or Commissioner of Customs, as the case may be, may, by order, assign such functions, as he may deem fit, to an officer of customs, who shall be the proper officer in relation to such functions. (2) An officer of customs may exercise the powers and discharge the duties conferred or imposed under this Act on any other officer of customs who is subordinate to him. (3) Notwithstanding anything contained in this section, a Commissioner (Appeals) shall not exercise the powers and discharge the duties conferred or imposed on an officer of customs other than those specified Chapter XV....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....wever does not stipulate territorial jurisdiction for the exercise of such functions. 18. Where the Central Government (prior to 11.5.2002) appoints a person under Section 4(1) of the Act to act as an officer of Customs without specifying territorial limits for his functions, it was for the Board under Section 5(1) to do so. We do not agree that such stipulations are optional. It is incumbent upon the Board to specify the territorial limits subject to which such officer of Customs may exercise the powers conferred on him under the Act. 19. The use of the term 'may' in section 5(4) does not present such an option to the Board but only qualifies the range of subjects in relation to which the Board may issue conditions. The subjects indicated therein are themselves only indicative/illustrative and not exhaustive. 20. In the present case, the subject Notification under which the ADGCEI derives powers to issue show cause under Section 28(1) of the Customs Act does not specify any territorial jurisdiction and without such specification, he cannot be seen to be a 'proper officer' as required under the Customs Act. The argument that the ADGCEI is assumed to have all India jurisdic....