Home Case Index All Cases Customs Customs + HC Customs - 2014 (10) TMI HC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2014 (10) TMI 836 - HC - CustomsProper officer under Section 28(1) of the Customs Act - proceedings initiated under Rule 8 of the Customs (Import of Goods at Concessional Rate of Duty for Manufacture of Excisable Goods) Rules, 1996 by the Deputy Commissioner of Central Excise - Held that:- For the first time, the Board appointed Deputy Commissioners or Assistant Commissioners of Central Excise as proper officers for the purpose of Section 17 and Section 28 of the Act. Till such time, neither the Board nor the Commissioner of Customs had appointed them as proper officers. Though the Parliament amended Section 28, it has no application to the facts of this case, because the Deputy Commissioner of Central Excise who initiated the proceedings is not the officer of Customs. As the impugned notice was issued on 21-8-2001 and subsequent notices issued, which are all prior to 2005 as on that date the Deputy Commissioner of Central Excise was not appointed under Section 4(1) of the Customs Act as a Customs officer nor was he appointed as a proper officer under Section 2(34) by the Board or the Commissioner of Customs, he had no jurisdiction to issue show cause notice. It is exactly what the Tribunal has said. - Decided against the revenue.
|