Delhi High Court - Orders
Gautam Spinners vs Commissioner Of Customs (Import), New ... on 30 May, 2023
Author: Yashwant Varma
Bench: Yashwant Varma, Dharmesh Sharma
$~8 to 11
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ W.P.(C) 122/2023 & CM APPL. 464/2023 (Stay)
GAUTAM SPINNERS ..... Petitioner
Through: Mr. Rajesh Rawal, Adv.
versus
COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS (IMPORT), NEW DELHI
& ANR. ..... Respondents
Through: Mr. Harpreet Singh, SSC with
Ms. Suhani Mathur and Mr.
Jatin Kumar Gaur, Advs.
9
+ W.P.(C) 2979/2023 & CM APPL. 11638/2023 (Stay)
PDG WOOL TRADERS ..... Petitioner
Through: Mr. Rajesh Rawal, Adv.
versus
COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS (IMPORTS), NEW DELHI
AND ANOTHER ..... Respondent
Through: Mr. Harpreet Singh, SSC with
Ms. Suhani Mathur and Mr.
Jatin Kumar Gaur, Advs.
10
+ W.P.(C) 3002/2023 & CM APPL. 11723/2023 (Stay)
S M TRADING CO ..... Petitioner
Through: Mr. Rajesh Rawal, Adv.
versus
COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS & ANR. ..... Respondents
Through: Mr. Harpreet Singh, SSC with
Ms. Suhani Mathur and Mr.
Jatin Kumar Gaur, Advs.
11
+ W.P.(C) 3003/2023 & CM APPL. 11726/2023 (Stay)
EASTMAN INTERNATIONAL ..... Petitioner
Through: Mr. Rajesh Rawal, Adv.
versus
This is a digitally signed order.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.
The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 08/10/2023 at 03:05:14
COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS & ANR. ..... Respondents
Through: Mr. Harpreet Singh, SSC with
Ms. Suhani Mathur and Mr.
Jatin Kumar Gaur, Advs.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE YASHWANT VARMA
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DHARMESH SHARMA
ORDER
% 30.05.2023
1. The instant petition assails the validity of a Show Cause Notice [SCN] dated 05 August 2021 issued by the Deputy Commissioner of Customs (Grade III), ICD (Import), Tughlakabad, New Delhi. The SCN purports to be under Section 28(4) of the Customs Act, 1962 [the Act] and refers to consignments imported vide five Bills of Entry numbered as 5959204, 5958177, 6299498, 6644758, 6645034.
2. As would be manifest from a reading of the SCN, the same came to be issued in the backdrop of certain investigations undertaken by the Directorate of Revenue Intelligence [DRI]. The SCN is dated 05 August 2021 and would thus ordinarily be governed by the provisions set out in Section 28(9).
3. The respondents, however, have referred to two directives issued by the Central Board of Indirect Taxes and Customs ["the Board"] dated 17 March 2021 and 16 April 2021 to contend that in light of those directions, the period of limitation within which the SCN was liable to be finalised would be governed by Section 28(9A)(c).
4. It becomes pertinent to note since the SCN had been issued under Section 28(4), it would be the period of one year as prescribed in Section 28(9)(b) which would have applied. Read along with the Proviso appended thereto, the respondents would have had a period of This is a digitally signed order.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 08/10/2023 at 03:05:14 one additional year subject to compliances being made in terms of the said statutory provision.
5. It is the case of the petitioner that not only has the period of one year not been extended as contemplated in law, even the directives issued by the Board would not apply for the following reasons. It was firstly contended that notwithstanding the flux in the legal position which prevailed in the perception of the respondents and stemming from the judgment rendered by the Supreme Court in Canon India Private Limited v. Commissioner of Customs, [2021 SCC OnLine SC 200], the Customs authorities always stood empowered to initiate action under Section 28(4). Learned counsel submits that Canon India essentially holds that the investigating authorities attached to the DRI would not fall within the ambit of the expression "proper officer" so as to be empowered to initiate action under Section 28(4) of the Act. The submission essentially was that nothing prevented the Customs authorities from taking further proceedings on the SCN.
6. It was then submitted that a reading of the directives of 17 March 2021 and 16 April 2021 would ex facie establish that those were concerned which SCNs that may have been issued on or by the DRI albeit contrary to the final decision rendered by the Supreme Court in Canon India. It was contended that a reading thereof would indicate that the same could not have had any application to a SCN which was issued against the petitioner by an authority of the Customs itself.
7. It was additionally argued that the directives of the Board were based and predicated upon certain SCNs' issued by DRI against Anil Aggarwal and 11 others. In view of the aforesaid, it was contended that the directives even if accepted at their face value would clearly not fall within the scope of "similar matters", a phrase which is employed in Section 28(9A)(c).
This is a digitally signed order.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 08/10/2023 at 03:05:15
8. Mr. Singh, learned counsel appearing for the Customs Department, prays for time to address submissions in the aforesaid light.
9. Let these matters be called again on 11.07.2023.
10. Interim orders granted earlier to continue till the next date fixed.
YASHWANT VARMA, J.
DHARMESH SHARMA, J.
MAY 30, 2023 bh This is a digitally signed order.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 08/10/2023 at 03:05:15