High CourtsDivision Bench(2016) 07 DEL CK 0114

Dugar Overseas Pvt. Ltd. vs Union of India

Delhi High Court · Decided on 25 July 2016 · Citation: (2016) 339 ELT 354

HON’BLE JUDGES
Dr. S. Muralidhar and Najmi Waziri, JJ.
RESULT
Disposed Off
CASE NUMBER
Writ Petition (C) No. 5465 of 2016 and C.M. No. 22781 of 2016 (Stay)

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

10 paragraphs · 395 words
1.

The challenge in this petition is to the constitutional validity of Sections 27A and 28AA of the Customs Act 1962, and the Notifications No. 75/2003-Cus(NT), dated 12-9-2003, 18/2011-Cus(NT), dated 1-3-2011 (w.e.f. 1-4-2011) and 33/2016-Cus(NT), dated 1-3-2016 (w.e.f. 1-4-2016). The central issue is whether the respondent is justified in adopting a discriminatory approach in the matter of interest, which is compensatory in character by awarding an assessee in effect interest at only 6% per annum on the delayed refunds while charging an assessee interest at present at 15% per annum on late payment of duty.

2.

Learned counsel for the petitioner states that he is not pressing the ground raised concerning jurisdiction of the respondent Directorate of Revenue Intelligence (DRI) to issue a demand for duty and interest prior to 8th April, 2011.

3.

Learned counsel for the Respondent No. 2/Customs Department however raises a preliminary objection regarding maintainability of the petition by pointing out that the adjudication arising out of the show cause notice (''SCN'') dated 16th April 2014 has been now consolidated in the office of the Commissioner of Customs, Nhava Sheva, Uran. However, it is pointed out by Dr. Prabhat Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner, that as is evident in para 16 of the impugned SCN, one of the adjudicating authorities mentioned in the SCN was the Commissioner of Customs, ICD, Tughlakabad, New Delhi. It is only subsequently that the adjudication has been consolidated in the office of the Commissioner of Customs, Nhava Sheva, Uran. He accordingly points out that a part of the cause of action did arise within the jurisdiction of this Court.

4.

The Court, accordingly, negatives the preliminary objection raised by the Respondent No. 2.

5.

Notice. Mr. Atul Batra, Mr. Sameer Jain and Mr. Satish Aggarwala, learned counsel accept notice for Respondent Nos. 1/UOI, 2/Customs and 3/DRI respectively. Replies be filed within four weeks. Rejoinder, if any, be filed before the next date.

6.

List on 28th November, 2016.

CM No. 22781 of 2016 (Stay)

7.

It is made clear that there is no stay of the adjudication of the SCN dated 16th April 2014, which will proceed in accordance with law.

8.

The final order passed in the adjudication proceedings, limited to the extent of the issue of interest, will be subject to the outcome of the present petition.

9.

The application is disposed of.