Ismartu India Pvt. Ltd. Vs Union of India And Others (Delhi High Court)
Delhi High Court held the issuance of notice under section 28(4) of the Customs Act post issuance of notice under section 28(1) on similar factual matrix is bad in law. Thus, subsequent notice issued u/s. 28(4) is set aside.
Facts- The present petition impugns the Show Cause Notice dated 01 September 2023 issued u/s. 28(4) of the Customs Act, 1962 by Respondent No. 2 on the argument that the impugned SCN dated 01 September 2023 is a subsequent (second) SCN and since a prior SCN, dated 25 July 2023, was already issued u/s. 28(1) of the Act, the subsequent SCN is bad in Law and not maintainable.
Conclusion- Held that the Respondent, in the Counter, makes a bald averment without specifying under which of the said heads the impugned notice would fall. In view of the abject failure on behalf of the Respondents to state either in the SCN itself or even specify as to which of the four heads enumerated in the counter, the alleged impugned notice is being issued as a ―Supplementary Notice“, we are of the view that the said contention needs to be rejected. Additionally, Section 28 of the Act, by its very nature posits, in a given set of facts and circumstances, the issuance of a SCN either under Section 28(1) or under Section 28(4) of the Act and not under both. Under the circumstances, we are unable to agree that the impugned SCN under section 28(4) of the Act post the issuance of the SCN under Section 28(1) could be termed a ―Supplementary Notice“.
