Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

(c) As the export obligation could not be fulfilled, the show cause notice dated 09.09.2003 came to be issued firstly, for the payment of an amount of Rs. 25,80,680/- being the amount of interest from the first day of import till 19.07.2002 and for future interest till payment. The show cause notice also called upon the noticee firm to show cause as to why action should not be taken to cancel/suspend the importer/exporter code. In such notice, it was further stated that the notice should be brought to the notice of the Directors asking them to forward their submissions. The show cause notice, thereafter, came to be adjudicated and, by the order-in-original, the Deputy Director General of Foreign Trade ordered recovery of the payment of penalty and while doing so, concluded as under:

7. The perusal of show cause notice which is the starting point of the proposed action, this Court would notice that the show cause notice reads as under:

"6. And whereas the above action of the noticee firm contravene the provision of para 4.20 of chapter 4 the Export and Imports Police Book 1997-2002 and section 11(1) (2) and (3) of the Foreign Trade (D & R) Act, 1992. Now therefore, in exercise of the powers vested in me under Section 8(1) (a)(b) of the Foreign Trade (D&R) Act, 1992, I call upon the noticee firm to show cause within a period of 30 days from the date of receipt of this notice as to why action should not be taken under Section 11(4) to cancel/suspend the importer/exporter code number 3794000013, if you want to be heard in person to explain the case, appear before the undersigned on 21.10.2003 at 3.00 p.m."

9. In view of the aforementioned this Court come to the conclusion that the show cause notice dated 09.09.2003 though titled to be a show cause notice under Section 14 and 11(2) of the FTDR does not fulfill the requirement of Section 11(2) in as much as it concerns the petitioner directors. Firstly as seen from the show cause notice the same is addressed to the noticee firm. Secondly the show cause notice is not directed towards the petitioner directors. Thirdly the proposed action under the show cause notice is for cancel/suspension the importer/exporter code and no penalty either on the company or the Directors is proposed. Fourthly no role or act is specified in the show cause notice by which the directors could be said to have abetted or HC-NIC Page 10 of 11 Created On Sat May 07 02:01:45 IST 2016 C/SCA/14240/2010 JUDGMENT attempted to make any export or import in contravention of any provisions of the FTDR or rules and order made thereunder or the Foreign Trade Policy. Fifthly so far as the petitioners are concerned no opportunity of hearing is given therefore there is clear violation of principle of natural justice. By merely providing the notice that the contents be brought to the notice of the Directors who may submit their response would not be sufficient notice to them. In the notice no allegations were made against the Directors. In fact the notice itself provided that all directors should be asked to forward their submissions separately "as the action as deemed fit is also proposed to be taken against them after examination of the reply submitted by them". This itself suggests that in the show cause notice there was no definite proposal against the Directors. In this view of the matter the show cause notice is no show cause notice in the eye of law and therefore the consequential orders are also required to be nullified. The impugned order in original dated 15.07.2009 and order in appeal dated 07.10.2010 are hereby quashed. The petition is allowed. Rule is made absolute.