Canon India Judgement  | Supreme Court Gives Direction To Forums Where Challenge To SCNs Issued By DRI Is Still Pending

Date:

In the Canon India Judgement review, the Supreme Court gives direction to forums where challenge to Show Cause Notices issued by DRI is still pending.

The bench of Chief Justice of India DY Chandrachud, Justices JB Pardiwala and Manoj Misra held that the officers of Directorate of Revenue Intelligence, Commissionerates of Customs (Preventive), Directorate General of Central Excise Intelligence and Commissionerates of Central Excise and other similarly situated officers are proper officers for the purposes of Section 28 and are competent to issue show cause notice. 

Table of Contents

Directions

The bench added that any challenge made to the maintainability of show cause notices issued by this particular class of officers, on the ground of want of jurisdiction for not being the proper officer, which remain pending before various forums shall now be dealt with in the following manner.

  1. Adjudication Pending Before High Court

The Court directed that where the show cause notices issued under Section 28 of the Act, 1962 have been challenged before the High Courts directly by way of a writ petition, the respective High Court shall dispose of such writ petitions in accordance with the observations made in this judgement and restore such notices for adjudication by the proper officer under Section 28.

Where the writ petitions have been disposed of by the respective High Court and appeals have been preferred against such orders which are pending before this Court, they shall be disposed of in accordance with this decision and the show cause notices impugned therein shall be restored for adjudication by the proper officer under Section 28.

Where the orders-in-original passed by the adjudicating authority under Section 28 have been challenged before the High Courts on the ground of maintainability due to lack of jurisdiction of the proper officer to issue show cause notices, the respective High Court shall grant eight weeks’ time to the respective assessee to prefer appropriate appeal before the Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT).

  1. Appeals Pending Before Supreme Court

Where the writ petitions have been disposed of by the High Court and appeals have been preferred against them which are pending before this Court, they shall be disposed of in accordance with this decision and this Court shall grant eight weeks’ time to the respective assessee to prefer appropriate appeals before the CESTAT.

  1. Appeals before the High Courts

Where the orders of CESTAT have been challenged before this
Court or the respective High Court on the ground of maintainability due to lack of jurisdiction of the proper officer to issue show cause notices, this Court or the respective High Court shall dispose of such appeals or writ petitions in accordance with the ruling in this judgment and restore such notices to the CESTAT for hearing the matter on merits.

  1. CESTAT

Where appeals against the orders-in-original involving issues pertaining to the jurisdiction of the proper officer to issue show cause notices under Section 28 are pending before the CESTAT, they shall now be decided in accordance with the observations made in this decision.

Case Details

Case Title: Commissioner Of Customs Vs. M/S Canon India Private Limited

Case No.: R.P.(C) No. 000400/2021

Juris Hour Team
Juris Hour Team
Juris Hour is an online news portal for reporting accurate and honest news, articles, judgments, Circulars, orders and notifications related to legal developments. We use the tagline ‘Proficiency At Your Doorstep’. Our mission is to simplify and communicate various legal developments in various spheres like civil, criminal, taxation, etc. and make people aware of their rights and duties in order to empower them to contribute in nation-building. Juris Hour is a team of young professionals turned legal journalists who are guided by the values enshrined in the Preamble of the Constitution of India and want to create more legal awareness in society by acting as a tool to aid legal reforms by offering a space for constructive criticism of the judiciary.

Share post:

Popular

More like this
Related