Home Case Index All Cases Customs Customs + HC Customs - 2021 (3) TMI HC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2021 (3) TMI 1068 - HC - CustomsValuation - related party transaction - respondent has furnished the Impugned Investigation Report concluding that the petitioner’s relationship with its group companies has influenced the declared prices warranting intervention and opining that the declared prices are to be rejected under Customs Valuation (Determination of Value of Imported Goods) Rules, 2007 - whether the impugned Investigation Report is issued in violation of the principles of natural justice, and if it is issued in violation of the principles of natural justice, what would be the appropriate order? - HELD THAT:- When the procedure laid down in the Circular dated 09.02.2016 in No.5/2016 is examined as against these factors, there cannot be any doubt that a Deputy Commissioner, or an Assistant Commissioner (SVB), in furnishing an Investigative Report discharges a quasi-judicial function with the responsibility of extending suitable opportunity to submit evidence and to render an investigative finding with the grounds substantiating such finding. Further, the investigative finding by a Deputy Commissioner, or an Assistant Commissioner (SVB), in the scheme of the procedure contemplated under the Circular dated 09.02.2016, cannot be called as an institutional decision, the hallmark of which is a decision taken by a large number of people who take part in the collective decision-making process rather than one designated person. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in Automotive Tyre Manufacturers Association v. Designated Authority and Others [2011 (1) TMI 7 - SUPREME COURT] after an overview of the decisions on compliance with the principles of natural justice has held that principle holds good irrespective of whether the power conferred on a statutory body or Tribunal is administrative or quasi-judicial - It is further declared in this decision that it is trite that the concept of natural justice can neither be put in a strait-jacket nor is it a general rule of universal application. There can be exceptions to the said doctrine, but the question whether the principle has to be applied or not is to be considered bearing in mind the express language and the basic scheme of the provision conferring the power; the nature of the power conferred and the purpose for which the power is conferred and the final effect of the exercise of that power. It is only upon a consideration of these matters that the question of application of the said principle can be properly determined. In the light of the undisputed fact that the personal hearing was held by Sri. H.C. Neelakantarya, the then Assistant Commissioner of Customs [SVB] and the Investigative Report is filed by the incumbent Assistant Commissioner Sri. K.S.V.Murthy, this Court will have to opine that this procedure, as held by the Hon’ble Supreme Court, offends one of the basic principles. Therefore, the impugned Investigating Report is liable to be quashed - petition allowed.
|