Disposed

Laxmi Organic Industries Limited through Shri Aniket Hirpara v. Union of India through Its Secretary, Department of Revenue

Bombay HC8 Nov 2023WP/13304/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this writ petition, the petitioner challenged a Show Cause Notice issued by customs authorities. The Single Judge held that the legal contentions must be canvassed before the adjudicating officer who is expected to consider Supreme Court precedents. The petition was disposed of with a direction to adjudicate expeditiously.

What did the court decide?

Direction to Respondents to adjudicate the impugned Show Cause Notice as expeditiously as possible, within six months.

Laxmi Organic Industries Limited through Shri Aniket… — Customs and Excise | Bombay HC (2023)

¶1

906.WP13304_2023.DOC

¶2

Vidya Amin

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶4

WRIT PETITION NO. 13304 OF 2023

¶5

Laxmi Organic Industries Ltd., through Shri Aniket … Petitioner Hirpara

¶6

Versus

¶7

Union of India, through its Secretary, Department of …Respondents Revenue & Ors.

¶8

Mr. Abhishek Rastogi a/w. Ms. Pooja M. Rastogi, Ms. Meenal Songire, Ms. Renita Alex for the petitioner.

¶9

Mr. Karan Adik a/w. Ms. Sangeeta Yadav for respondent no. 4. Ms. Sangeeta Yadav for respondent no. 3.

¶10

_______________________ CORAM: G. S. KULKARNI & JITENDRA JAIN, JJ. DATED: 08 November, 2023

¶11

P.C.

¶12

We have heard Mr. Rastogi, learned counsel for the petitioner on this petition.

¶13

At the outset, we need to note the prayers as made in this petition, which

¶14

reads thus:-

¶15

“a) Issue a writ, order, or direction in the nature of Mandamus,or any other appropriate writ, order, or direction quashing and setting aside the impugned Show Cause Notice dated 03.10.2019 (Exhibit A) issued by the Respondent No.3 being illegal and without authority of law;

¶16

b) Issue a writ, order, or direction in the nature of Declaration,or any other appropriate writ, order or direction reading down Section 97 of the Finance Act, 2022 inasmuch as it retroactively validates actions of Respondent No.3 to issue the impugned Show Cause Notice dated 03.10.2019 (Exhibit A);

¶17

c) Issue a writ, order, or direction in the nature of Declaration,or any other appropriate writ, order, or direction reading down or declaring Notifcation No.40/2012 dated 02.05.2012(Exhibit B) and Notifcation

¶18

Page 1 of 4 08 November, 2023

¶19

906.WP13304_2023.DOC

¶20

No.17/2002 – Customs (NT)dated 07.03.2002 (Exhibit C) to be illegal and invalid, insofarthe conjoint reading of the said Notifcations thereofempowers Respondent No.3 to issue the impugned ShowCause Notice dated 03.10.2019 (Exhibit A);

¶21

d) Issue a writ, order, or direction staying the implementation,operation and execution of the impugned Show Cause Notice dated 03.10.2019 (Exhibit A) and proceedings emanatingtherefrom, pending disposal of the present writ petition;

¶22

e) Issue a writ, order, or direction restraining the Respondentsfrom passing fnal orders in relation to the impugned Show Cause Notice dated 03.10.2019 (Exhibit A), pending disposalof the present writ petition;

¶23

f) Grant ex-parte ad-interim relief in terms of prayer clause (d)and/or (c) above, or any other ex-parte ad-interim relief asthis Hon’ble Court may deem fit, proper, just, and/ornecessary in the interest of complete justice; and

¶24

g) Grant such further or other reliefs as this Hon’ble Court may deem ft, proper, just, and/or necessary in the interest ofcomplete justice.”

¶25

It is submitted by Mr. Rastogi that the designated offcer, who has issued the show cause notice, would not have any jurisdiction to issue the show cause notice considering the decision of the Supreme Court in the case of Canon India Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Customs¹ .

¶26

It is informed by Ms. Yadav, learned counsel for respondent no. 3 that the show cause notice would now be adjudicated as per the Notification No. 59/2019-Customs(N.T./CAA/DRI) dated 6 November, 2019 issued by Additional Director, Directorate of Revenue Intelligence, Mumbai.

¶27

Mr. Rastogi would refer to prayers as made in the writ petition to submit that the powers under Section 97 of the Finance Act cannot be exercised, so as

¶28

1 2021 SCC Online SC 200

¶29

Page 2 of 4 08 November, 2023

¶30

906.WP13304_2023.DOC

¶31

to retroactively validate actions of Respondent No.3 in issuing the impugned show cause notice, which is dated 3^rd October 2019.

¶32

Mr. Adik, learned counsel for respondent no. 4 and Ms. Yadav, learned counsel for respondent no. 3 would primarily submit that the challenge is to the show cause notice dated 3^rd October 2019 and certainly the grounds raised in regard to the legality of its issuance, being covered by the decision of the Supreme Court in the case of Canon India Pvt. Ltd.Vs. Commissioner of Customs (supra) as sought to be urged by the petitioner including the authority and jurisdiction of the officer issuing show cause notice can certainly be a subject matter, which can be taken into consideration, qua such legal position by the adjudicating officer who can pass appropriate orders.

¶33

After hearing learned counsel for the parties, we are of the opinion that the Petitioner needs to canvas such legal position as asserted in the present proceedings before the adjudicating officer, who as fairly pointed out on behalf of the respondents would certainly take into consideration all such contentions including the issues on the law as laid down by the Supreme Court in the case of Canon India Pvt. Ltd. vs. Commissioner of Customs (supra)and pass appropriate orders on the show cause notice.

¶34

We keep open all contentions of the petitioner as urged in the present petition including on interest considering the decision of the Supreme Court

¶35

Page 3 of 4 08 November, 2023

¶36

906.WP13304_2023.DOC

¶37

in Union of India & Ors. vs. Cosmo Films Limited² to be asserted before the adjudicating officer.

¶38

The petition is accordingly disposed of directing the Respondents to adjudicate the show cause notice as expeditiously as possible and in any event within a period of six months from today. As the show cause notice is issued about four years back, there cannot be any further delay on such adjudication.

¶39

All contentions of the petitioner are expressly kept open,to be agitated in the adjudication of the show cause notice. No order as to costs

¶40

(JITENDRA JAIN, J.)

¶41

2 Civil Appeal No. 290 of 2023

¶42

Page 4 of 4 08 November, 2023

Laxmi Organic Industries Limited through Shri Aniket Hirpara v. Union of India through Its Secretary, Department of Revenue

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Laxmi Organic Industries Limited through Shri Aniket Hirpara v. Union of India through Its Secretary, Department of Revenue

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Smt. Rasika Ramchandra Randive Vs the State of Maharashtra Thr. Sec. School Education and Sports Dept. and Ors.

Kasari Shikshan Prasarak Mandal Thr Its President and Ors. Vs the State of Maharashtra Thr the Secretary and Ors.

Pradeep Sadhu Sonawale Vs the Municipal Corporation of Gr. Mumbai through the Commissioner and Ors.

Vijaykumar Bhagwan Pawar and Ors. Vs the State of Maharashtra Thr Its Principal Secretary School Educatin Department and Ors.

Shri. Vinayak Ramchandra Patil Vs Zilla Parishad, Sindhudurg and Ors.

Arun Jayaram Kale Vs State of Maharashtra Thr Co. Operation Textiles and Marketing Dept and Ors.