Customs, Excise and Gold Tribunal - Delhi
Sh. Ram Kr. Agarwal vs Cc, Indore on 15 May, 2001
ORDER
P.G. Chacko
1. Having carefully examined the records and heard both sides, I allow this stay application unconditionally and proceed to dispose of the appeal itself finally at this stage.
2. Heard ld. Advocate, Sh. M. Venkataraman for the appellant and ld. JDR, Sh. J. Singh for the respondents.
3. A perusal of the records and examination of the submission made before me today have brought out the following undisputed facts:- The Commissioner's order impugned in the present appeal was passed in adjudication of show-cause notice dated 29.9.89. That show-cause notice had proposed to confiscate certain seized goods and impose penalty on the appellant. While that notice was pending adjudication before the Commissioner, the party challenged the notice before the Madhya Pradesh High Court in a writ petition filed under Articles 226 nd 227 of the Constitution. The Commissioner who issued the show-cause notice was also one of the respondents to that writ petition. The High Court allowed the writ petition on 15.11.2000 and quashed the show-cause notice. The Commissioner was aware of the order of the High Court. Nevertheless, he proceeded to adjudicate upon the show-cause notice and passed his order on 17.11.2000, which is the order impugned in the present appeal.
4. The short question is whether the Commissioner could have lawfully adjudicated upon a show-cause notice which was set aside by the High Court before the date of adjudication. Ld. JDR submits that the Commissioner was not aware of the High Courts's decision on 17.11.2000 as a certified copy of the High Court's order was received by him much later. I am unable to accept this submission. The Commissioner was a party to the writ petition and the High Court's order was pronounced in open Court on 15.11.2000 in the presence of the Commissioner's counsel. Hence the Commissioner had notice of the High Court's decision. The Commissioner issued his order on 17.11.2000 whereas the show-cause notice had been quashed by the High Court on 15.11.2000. Hence, on the date on which the impugned order was passed, the show-cause notice did not survive for adjudication. The order passed by the Commissioner is, therefore, null and void. The appeal is allowed.