Tally
coaching
CA Classes

Share on Facebook

Share on Twitter

Share on LinkedIn

Share on Email

Share More

The issues raised in SCN being time barred left open to be decided by the respondent

LinkedIn


Court :
Delhi High Court

Brief :
This petition has been preferred with the following prayers:- W.P.(C) 842/2021

Citation :
W.P.(C)-842/2021

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Date of Decision : 21st January, 2021

W.P.(C) 842/2021 & CM APPL.2146/2021 (exemption)
M/S NEW ERA TRADING PVT LTD ..... Petitioner
Through: Mr.Prem Rajan with Mr.Himanshu
Kaushik, Advocates.

versus

THE COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS EXPORT
& ANR. ..... Respondents
Through: Mr.Arunesh Sharma, Advocate for
Mr.Harpreet Singh, SSC for R-1.
Ms.Akanksha Mehra, Advocate for Mr.Aditya
Singh, Standing Counsel for R-2/DRI.

CORAM:
HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE
HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE JYOTI SINGH

JUDGMENT

D. N. PATEL, Chief Justice (Oral)

CM APPL.2146/2021 (exemption)

Allowed, subject to just exceptions.
The application is disposed of.

W.P.(C) 842/2021

1. This petition has been preferred with the following prayers:- W.P.(C) 842/2021

“(a) To issue a writ of Certiorari quashing the show cause notice dated 24.01.2020 issued under DRI/AZU/CI/ENQ39/(INT-25/2016)/6825/ being time barred as per provisions of Section 28 of the Custom Act,1962; and/ or

(b) such other appropriate writ, order or direction as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit may also be issued.” (emphasis supplied)

2. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner has taken this court to the show cause notice dated 24.01.2020, issued by respondent No.2, which  is Annexure A-1

3. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner has relied upon State ofPunjab v. Bhatinda District Co-op. Milk P. Union Ltd.; 2007 (217) E.L.T.325 (S.C.), Madina (UZ) Impex v. Union of India; 2019 (368) E.L.T. 555(Del.) and Famina Knit Fabs v. Union of India; 2020 (371) E.L.T. 97 (P &H) and submits that the question of the SCN being time barred be decided by this Court at the threshold. to the memo of this writ petition. It is contended by learned counsel that (a) show cause notice (SCN) issued by respondent No.2 isbarred by time and (b) Respondent No.2 does not have the power, jurisdiction and authority to issue the aforementioned SCN. Moreover, learned counsel submits that the grievance ventilated in the present petition is covered by various decisions of the Hon’ble Supreme Court and this Court and other High Courts in favour of the petitioner. 

To know more in details find the attachment file

 

Guest
on 24 February 2021
Published in LAW
Views : 22
downloaded 8 times
Report Abuse

LinkedIn







Trending Tags