Dismissed

M/S.Sea Queen Shipping Services v. the Principal Commissioner of Customs (General)

Madras HC13 Sept 2024WP/27106/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The petitioner filed a writ petition challenging a show cause notice as being barred by limitation and without jurisdiction. The court held that the petitioner was required to file a reply to the notice before challenging it, deeming the petition premature. The writ petition was dismissed.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition dismissed; connected miscellaneous petition closed.

M/S.Sea Queen Shipping Services Vs the Principal… — Banking and Recovery | Madras HC (2024)

¶1

W.P.No.27106 of 2024

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

Dated : 13.09.2024

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HON'BLE Mr. JUSTICE KRISHNAN RAMASAMY

¶6

W.P.No.27106 of 2024 & W.M.P.No.29630 of 2024

¶7

M/s.Sean Queen Shipping Services Private Limited, License No.226/CHA (PAN No.AAACS6709B), Rep. Kapali Arunachalapuram 2nd Street, Adyar, Chennai - 600 020. ... Petitioner

¶8

Vs.

¶9

1.The Principal Commissioner of Customs (General), Chennai Customs Zone, Custom House, No.60, Rajaji Salai, Chennai - 600 001.

¶10

2.The Inquiry Officer, Assistant Commissioner of Customs, (Preventive Commissionerate), Custom House, No.60, Rajaji Salai, Chennai - 600 001. ... Respondents

¶11

Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a Writ of Certiorari, to call for the entire records of the first respondent herein leading to the issuance of the impugned show cause notice dated 21/2024 under Regulation 17(1) of CBLR 2018, dated 04.07.2024 issued in F.No.GEN/CB/SCN/6/2024-CBS, by the first respondent and quash the same as illegal, arbitrary, unfair and without jurisdiction and beyond limitation.

¶12

1/6

¶13

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶14

W.P.No.27106 of 2024

¶15

For Petitioner : Mr.A.K.Jayaraj

¶16

For Respondents : Mr.J.Vasu Standing Counsel

¶17

ORDER

¶18

This writ petition challenges the show cause notice dated 04.07.2024

¶19

issued by the first respondent under Regulation 17(1) of the Customs Brokers Licensing Regulations, 2018 (hereinafter referred to as "CBLR").

¶20

2. The learned counsel for the petitioner contends that earlier show cause notices bearing Nos.37/2023-24 and 45/2023-24, both dated 22.12.2023, and No.46/2023-24 dated 21.12.2023, were issued by the Principal Commissioner of Customs, Air Cargo Complex (Import), New Delhi, for the alleged contravention of the Regulations on the part of the petitioner. The learned counsel would further submit that the present show cause notice dated 04.07.2024 came to be issued by the Principal Commissioner of Customs (General), Chennai Customs Zone, Chennai and the same is challenged by the petitioner on the ground that it had been issued beyond 90 days from the date of offence report and that, the earlier show cause notices under section 124 of the Customs Act, were already issued to the petitioner

¶21

2/6

¶22

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶23

W.P.No.27106 of 2024

¶24

and hence, the present proceedings is barred by limitation and without jurisdiction.

¶25

3. Per contra, the learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondent would submit that upon investigation, it was found that the importers had mis-declared and undervalued the goods and hence, they are liable to be penalised under the provisions of the Customs Act, 1962. It is further submitted that based on the offence reports received, the show cause notice came to be issued, to which, the petitioner has to file their reply. Without filing their reply, they rushed to this court to challenge the same and hence the present writ petition is not maintainable.

¶26

4. I have heard the submissions on either side and perused the materials available on record.

¶27

5. According to the petitioner, the show cause notice which is impugned herein, is barred by limitation and without jurisdiction, as it had been issued beyond 90 days from the date of offence report, as prescribed under Regulation 17(1) of the Customs Brokers Licensing Regulations, 2018 (CBLR). On a perusal of the show cause notice, which is impugned herein, it is seen that offence reports were received in the form of show cause notices

¶28

3/6

¶29

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶30

W.P.No.27106 of 2024

¶31

dated 22.12.2023 and 21.12.2023 from the Principal Commissioner of Customs, Air Cargo Complex (Import), New Delhi, against the Customs Brokers. Pursuant to the same, the Principal Commissioner of Customs (General), Chennai Customs Zone, initiated the proceedings against the petitioner herein by issuing the present show cause notice dated 04.07.2024. As such, it is for the petitioner to give their reply to the same by raising all the grounds available to them, including the limitation and jurisdiction along with the necessary supportive documents. Without adopting such course, the petitioner approached this court by filing the present writ petition, which is premature and hence, the same cannot be entertained at this stage.

¶32

6. Finding no merit, the writ petition is liable to be dismissed and is accordingly, dismissed. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.

¶33

13.09.2024

¶34

Speaking/Non-speaking order Index : Yes / No Neutral Citation : Yes / No

¶35

r n s

¶36

4/6

¶37

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶38

W.P.No.27106 of 2024

¶39

¶40

1.The Principal Commissioner of Customs (General), Chennai Customs Zone, Custom House, No.60, Rajaji Salai, Chennai - 600 001.

¶41

2.The Inquiry Officer, Assistant Commissioner of Customs, (Preventive Commissionerate), Custom House, No.60, Rajaji Salai, Chennai - 600 001.

¶42

5/6

¶43

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶44

W.P.No.27106 of 2024

¶45

KRISHNAN RAMASAMY.J., r n s

¶46

W.P.No.27106 of 2024 & W.M.P.No.29630 of 2024

¶47

13.09.2024

¶48

6/6

¶49

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

M/S.Sea Queen Shipping Services v. the Principal Commissioner of Customs (General)

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/S.Sea Queen Shipping Services v. the Principal Commissioner of Customs (General)

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sri Rujula International Vs the Princiapal Chief Commissioner of Income Tax

Apparel Marketing And Manufacturing International Vs The Principal Chief Commissioner Of Income Tax

Eagle Earth Movers Pvt. Ltd. Vs The Principal Chief Commissioner Of Income Tax

Sakthi Foundation India Pvt. Ltd. Vs The State Tax Officer

M/S Shivpad Engineers Pvt. Ltd. Vs the Deputy Commissioner (St)

Radha Regent Hotels P Ltd. Vs Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, CHENNAI-4