Case Laws
Acts
Notifications
Circulars
Classification
Forms
Manuals
Articles
News
D. Forum
Highlights
Notes
🚨 Important Update for Our Users
We are transitioning to our new and improved portal - www.taxtmi.com - for a better experience.
⚠️ This portal will be discontinued on 31-07-2025
If you encounter any issues or problems while using the new portal,
please
let us know via our feedback form
so we can address them promptly.
Home
2019 (6) TMI 1233 - HC - CustomsAdvance License Scheme - import of copper concentrate - violation of conditions of the advance licenses - the Central Excise authorities were still of the view that a show-cause notice was required to be issued to the Company - HELD THAT - It is seen that the appellants are issued with the show cause notice by the first respondent. Their challenge against the said show cause notice was not successful before this Court. However they approached the Apex Court and filed Special Leave Petition challenging the order passed by this Court in refusing to interfere with the show cause notice. Though the appellants by way of an interim relief before the Apex Court sought for stay of further proceedings it is seen that the Apex Court by order dated 21.04.2017 permitted the Commissioner of Customs Tuticorin namely the first respondent herein to pass final order and keep it in a sealed cover - Thus from the perusal of the said interim order of the Apex Court it is evident that the first respondent can go ahead with the adjudication process and also pass the final orders and however he has to keep such order in a sealed cover. Whether the rejection of the request made by the appellants for furnishing certain documents needs to be interfered with in these appeals? - HELD THAT - It is not in dispute that the appellants already filed an RTI application and obtained copies of the letters dated 13.09.2014 and 09.01.2015 sent by the Customs Department to the Central Exercise Department. They want reply filed by the Central Excise Department in response those two letters and also another letter dated 29.04.2011 issued by the Customs Department. When it is the specific case of the first respondent that those documents sought by the appellants are not relied upon documents in the show cause notice we failed to understand as to how the appellants are justified in making the demand in the enquiry to furnish such of those documents which are not relied upon documents by the revenue. The department cannot rely upon certain documents to proceed against the other person without furnishing copies of such documents to him so as to enable such person to defend the enquiry effectively. At the same time if the department has not relied on certain documents which are sought to be furnished by the other side certainly there is no vested right on the person to seek such documents in the domestic enquiry/adjudicatory proceedings - The right to seek a document under the Right to Information Act cannot be equated with a right to seek a document in the domestic enquiry/adjudicatory proceedings since both the rights are not on the same footing and on the other hand they are on different context. Under the Right to Information Act a person seeking certain documents need not give any reason for his requirement. However if the documents sought under RTI application is either prohibited or exempted document as contemplated under Section 8 of the said Act the same need not be furnished. It is stated that the appellants submitted that an RTI application for furnishing documents and that the same is pending. If that be the case it is for the appellants to work out their remedy under the said application in a manner known to law as this Court at this stage is not expressing any view on that application at it would go beyond the scope and jurisdiction of the present appeals. There is no question of law much less substantial one as raised in these appeals arises for consideration to entertain these appeals - appeal dismissed.
|