TMI Blog2021 (6) TMI 372X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 2016 and enclosed few case laws - Without awaiting for the adjudication of the impugned show cause notice, the petitioner has rushed to this court by way of the present writ petition on 5.12.2016. Since the petitioner has partly had acquiesced in the said show cause proceedings by participating in the said proceedings, it was not open for the petitioner to file this writ a petition questioning the jurisdiction of the respondent. Petition dismissed. - W.P.No.43185 of 2016 And WMP.No.37016 of 2016 - - - Dated:- 27-5-2021 - Honourable Mr.Justice C.Saravanan For the Petitioner : Mr.G.Derrick Sam For the Respondents : Mr.T.Pramod Kumar Chopda Senior Standing Counsel ORDER This writ petition has been filed to quash the i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed 19.03.2010 and 481515 dated 11.03.2010. 4. It is submitted that in the show cause notice itself there was a reference to bill of entry No.481515 dated 11.03.2010 which was processed by the petitioner. It is submitted that long after the said show cause notice was issued and revocation of license of the said Maharaja Carbo vide order in Original No.F.No.R-277/CHA dated 28.05.2014, the impugned show cause notice has been issued to the petitioner on 01.07.2016. 5. It is further submitted that even otherwise, the impugned show cause notice is much after passing of the Order in original No.F.No.CAU/DRI/CHE/41/2012 dated 30.12.2015 and was therefore barred by law. 6. Under such circumstances, the learned counsel for the petitioner dre ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... fidavit wherein it has been stated that eventhough the offence was committed during March 2010 and DRI issued a show cause notice on 11.09.2012, as a licensing authority, the respondent, namely, the Commissioner of Customs, Chennai, Commissionerate VIII came to know about the commission of offence only on 06.06.2016 vide a letter C.No.VIII/13.02.2009 CHAI dated 20.05.2016 received by the Assistant Commissioner (CBLF) Tuticorin and therefore the impugned show cause notice dated 01.07.2006 was well within the time prescribed under Regulation 20(1) of CBLR, 2013. 9. The learned counsel for the respondents further drew my attention to the additional affidavit filed on behalf of the respondent pursuant to the direction of this Court on 23.11. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ennai was only marked to the notices, Commissioner of Customs (Sea port-Imports), Customs House, Chennai, Commissioner of Customs, Tuticorin. The Order in Original No.43946/2015 dated 30.12.2015, copy was marked only to notices, Chief Commissioner of Customs, Customs House, Chennai, the ADG, DRI, Chennai, Commissioner of Customs, Tuticorin, Asst/Dy.Commissioner of Customs, Group I, Customs House, Chennai 1 who comes under Chennai II Commissionerate. 10. Under these circumstances, it is submitted since the 1st respondent as the licence authority came to the knowledge of the alleged offence only on 06.06.2016 vide a letter dated 20.05.2016 received from the Assistant Commissioner (CBLF), Tuticorin, the show cause notice was within time. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... payment of appropriate customs duty. In pursuance of the said intelligence, five live consignments imported by M/s.Lubecon Petro Products Pvt. Ltd., from M/s.Al Zahara Petro Chemicals LLC, UAE were examined. 4. While investigating the aforesaid case, it was also revealed that they also imported and cleared 41 containers covered under 3 bills of entry, base oil by mis-declaring as RPO (Rubber Processing Oil) in the name of M/s.Quality Lube Products, pvt., Ltd., Chennai. Accordingly, a Show Cause Notice F.No.VIII/48/10/2012- DRI dated 11.09.2012 was issued. 5. Shri J.Raja Anathan, Managing director of M/s.Quality Lube Products Pvt. Ltd., in his voluntary statements under Section 108 of the Customs Act, 1962, stated that 41 cont ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... E.Rajendran; that he ised the login ID and password of M/s.Paragon Logistics, Chennai for online filing the customs documents at Tuticorin; that he had cleared import cargo with description of rubber processing extender oil; that he or his staffs had not obtained authorization letters from the subject IEC holders/importers; that Shri Sadasivam and Shri Tamil selvam (both are employees of Shri.Mohamed Azam, the supplier) informed him that the importers are known to them; that in good faith he handled import consignments and cleared the same to them instead of importer. Thereby, he knowingly dealt with the persons who were not the importers or his representatives.'' 14. Prima facie it appears that the impugned show cause notic ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
