9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (8) TMI 397X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Respondents Through: Mr. P.C. Yadav, Senior panel counsel with Ms. Neha Gupta, Advocates for Respondent No.1 Mr. Amit Bansal & Mr. Aman Rewaria, Advocates for Respondent No.2 Mr. Harpreet Singh, Senior standing counsel O R D E R 1. The short question in both these cases is whether the impugned show cause notices (SCNs) issued on 15th December, 2016 and 26th December 2016 under the Customs Act ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 0/2018 is concerned, while directing notice to issue in the petition on 9th March, 2018 this Court directed that the adjudication proceedings shall remain stayed till the next date of hearing. 5. The explanation offered in the counter affidavit filed in W.P.(C) 9173/2017 for the delay in issuing the impugned SCN was not found satisfactory by this Court. By an order dated 6th February, 2018 the Re ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... above order passed in WP(C) No. 9173/2017 an additional affidavit was filed on 17th April, 2018 by the Respondents in which in Para C it is stated "the deponent humbly states that despite numerous efforts the reason for delay in issuance of show cause notice is not discernible from the records available in the office of the answering Respondents." 8. As far as WP(C) No.2190/2018 is concerned, in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... arned counsel for the Respondent referred to the decision of the Gujarat High Court in Dadri Inorganics Private Limited v. Commissioner of Customs 2010 (260) ELT 61 (Guj) which according to him supported his case. He also placed reliance on the decision of the Karnataka High Court in Gemini Dyeing & Printing Mills Limited v. Commissioner of Customs, Bangalore 2014 (304) ELT 51 (Kar). 11. The latt ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... f the statute, the rights and liabilities thereunder and other relevant factors. 13. In the present case the delay of over nine years in WP(C) No. 9173/2017 and over five years in WP(C) No. 2190/2018 in issuing the SCNs have not been satisfactorily explained by the Respondents. 14. For the aforementioned reasons, this Court quashes both impugned SCNs. The writ petitions are allowed. The applicat ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
