Disposed

M/s.Raj Petro Specialities Pvt. v. The Additional Director Genera

Madras HC24 Aug 2021WP/6935/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Two writ petitions challenging customs show-cause notices were disposed of. Since the petitioner deposited the entire duty demand, the High Court directed the authorities to adjudicate the case on merits rather than quashing the notices.

What did the court decide?

Directions to respondents to accept objections/defenses and adjudicate the matter on merits; writs dismissed.

M/s.Raj Petro Specialities Pvt. Vs The Additional Director Genera — Madras HC (2021) — LawSathi Research

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 24.08.2021

¶2

CORAM THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE S.M.SUBRAMANIAM W.P.NOS.6935 & 6936 OF 2017 AND W.M.P.NOS.7525 & 7526 OF 2017 M/s. Raj Petro Specialities Pvt. Ltd., Rep. by its Director: Nalin J.Nanavati, No.73/1B, Vaikkadu Village, Manali, Chennai – 600 103. ...Petitioner in both WPs. Vs

¶3

The Additional Director General, Directorate of Revenue Intelligence, Ahmedabad Zonal Unit, Near Mahalaxmi Cross Road, Paldi, Ahmedabad – 380 007.

¶4

The Additional Commissioner of Customs, Chennai II, Customs House, Rajaji Salai, Chennai – 600 001. ...Respondents in both WPs.

¶5

COMMON PRAYER : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a Writ of Certiorari to call for the records relating to the impugned show-cause notice bearing Nos.F.No.DRI/AZU/GRU/Raj Petro/INT-28/2015-SFO991 & F.No.DRI/AZU/GRU/Raj Petro/INT-28/2015-RAE989, dated 18-11-2016 issued by the 1^st respondent and quash the same as issued without authority of law, without jurisdiction and offends the fundamental right guaranteed under Article 19(1)(g) of the Constitution of India.

¶6

For Petitioner : Mr.M.S.Mudi Mannan

¶7

For Respondents: Mr.V.Sundareswaran,

¶8

Senior Standing Counsel for R1 Mr.T.Pramod Kumar Chopda Senior Standing Counsel for R2 ..in both WPs.

¶9

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

¶10

COMMON ORDER

¶11

Both the writ petitions are filed challenging the showcause notices, issued in proceedings dated 18.11.2016.

¶12

Setting out the facts and details as well as the allegations against the petitioner, the show-cause notices were issued without prejudice to any other action that may be taken against the noticee and the petitioner was provided with an opportunity to respond to the show-cause notices. The petitioner instead of defending the case, has chosen to file the present writ petitions.

¶13

The petitioner is a Company incorporated under the provisions of the Indian Companies Act and engaged in the manufacture of transformer oils, liquid parafins, white oils, lubricants, etc. The grounds raised in the present Writ Petition would reveal that mostly relatable to the disputed facts and legal grounds. However, the mixed question of law and fact is to be decided by the Competent Authority by adjudicating the grounds raised by the petitioner. High Court cannot adjudicate such disputed facts and circumstances elaborately in a writ proceedings under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.

¶14

No writ is entertainable against the show-cause notice in a routine manner. A writ against the show-cause notice may be entertained, if such notices are issued by an incompetent Authority, having no jurisdiction directly in violation of any of the statutory provisions. If an allegation of malafides are raised, then also a writ may be entertained, provided the authority against whom such an allegation of malafides are raised, if impleaded as a party respondent in his personal capacity in the writ proceedings. In all other circumstances, the noticee is bound to respond to the show-cause notice and the Authority Competent is bound to adjudicate the merits in accordance with law and take a decision and pass orders.

¶15

The learned counsel for the petitioner made a submission that the petitioner has paid the entire Customs Duty including the interest. In view of the fact that the petitioner has already deposited the entire demand of Customs of Duty, the case is to be adjudicated on merits and in accordance with law.

¶16

This being the factum established, the petitioner is at liberty to submit its objections, defense statements, documents, evidences etc., to the respondents, within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. In the event of receiving any such objections, the Competent Authority shall adjudicate the same on merits and in accordance with law and pass appropriate orders by following the procedures

¶17

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

¶18

contemplated.

¶19

With these directions, both the writ petitions are disposed of. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.

¶20

Sd/-

¶21

Assistant Registrar(CS VIII)

¶22

//True Copy//

¶23

Sub Assistant Registrar

¶24

Pns/Kbs

¶25

¶26

The Additional Director General, Directorate of Revenue Intelligence, Ahmedabad Zonal Unit, Near Mahalaxmi Cross Road, Paldi, Ahmedabad – 380 007.

¶27

The Additional Commissioner of Customs, Chennai II, Customs House, Rajaji Salai, Chennai – 600 001.

¶28

+1cc to Mr.T.Pramod Kumar Chopda, Advocate, S.R.No.42542 +1cc to Mr.Mr.V.Sundareswaran , Advocate, S.R.No.42493

¶29

W.P.Nos.6935 & 6936 of 2017 and W.M.P.Nos.7525 & 7526 of 2017

¶30

PM(CO) PL/20/09/2021

¶31

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

M/s.Raj Petro Specialities Pvt. v. The Additional Director Genera

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/s.Raj Petro Specialities Pvt. v. The Additional Director Genera

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Kalpathi S Aghoram Vs the State of Tamilnadu

R.Vasanti Ram Narayan Vs the State of Tamil Nadu

R.Vasanti Ram Narayan Vs the State of Tamil Nadu

Tvl.Kalpathi Investments Pvt. Vs the State of Tamilnadu Rep. by

M/S.Bmw India Pvt. Ltd, Vs State of Tamil Nadu

K.M.Chinnadurai, Vs the Assistant Commissioner(Ct)