Home Case Index All Cases Customs Customs + HC Customs - 2022 (6) TMI HC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2022 (6) TMI 724 - HC - CustomsLevy of penalty on the Director of Company - import of goods under advance licence scheme - non-fulfillment of export obligation - petitioner has not been served any show cause notice dated 26th April, 2002 nor given a notice of personal hearing before passing of the adjudication order - violation of principles of natural justice - HELD THAT:- To the averment in the petition in paragraph no.22 that petitioner was neither served with a show cause notice dated 26th April, 2002 nor petitioner was given any notice of personal hearing before passing the adjudication order dated 5th February, 2008 it has not been denied in the affidavit in reply. Petitioner’s averment in paragraph no.22 that demand notice dated 7th August, 2001 and refusal order dated 3rd October, 2001 referred to in the adjudication order dated 5th February, 2008 was not served on petitioner has also not been denied in the affidavit in reply. Therefore, on this ground alone the adjudication order should go. When we read the adjudication order dated 5th February, 2008, the entire order proceeds on the basis that obligations to comply with the provisions of FTDR Act was that of the company, the notices were issued to the company and even penalty has been imposed on the company. hough penalty has been imposed on the company because company has defaulted in the export obligation imposed on the licence, in the adjudication order, Respondent No.3 has gone ahead and stated that the noticee firm and its Directors are hereby directed to pay above penalty amount and produce the requisite evidence to his office. There is no discussion at all in the order as to how the Directors of the company become personally liable to pay penalty amount. The adjudication order also is fallacious because the entire order proceeds on the basis that show cause notice has been given to the company, personal hearing has been given to the company, penalty has been imposed on the company but penalty is attempted to be recovered from the Director without any basis being laid in the adjudication order. Therefore, the adjudication order dated 5th February, 2008 is also quashed and set aside to the extent of the directions upon petitioner to pay the penalty amount. Petition disposed off.
|