Case Law Details
Modern Insecticides Limited Vs Commissioner of Customs (CESTAT Chandigarh)
Although Review Petition filed by the Revenue has been pending before the Hon’ble Apex Court in the above said case but there after in the case of Commissioner of Customs Kandla vs. M/s. Agarwal Metals & Alloys (supra) again the Hon’ble Apex Court has follow up the decision of Canon India Pvt. Ltd. (supra) and hold that the Additional Director General (ADG), DRI is not a proper Officer within the meaning of Section 28 (4) read with Section 2 (34) of Customs Act, 1962. Further, the said decision has been followed by the Hon’ble Madras High Court in the case of Quantum Coal Energy Pvt. Ltd. (supra) and the jurisdictional Hon’ble High Court of Punjab & Haryana in the case of Steelman Industries vs. Union of India & Ors. (supra).
In view of the above, following the above said decisions, we hold that Additional Director General, DRI, Ludhiana is not a proper Officer to issue Show Cause Notice under Section 28 (4) read with Section 2 (34) of Customs Act, 1962. Therefore, the impugned proceedings are set aside.
FULL TEXT OF THE CESTAT CHANDIGARH ORDER
Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.
