TMI Blog1995 (2) TMI 73X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... etitions this Court had observed that it was better if the C.B.I. had taken up the investigation, because there was some suspicion as to the involvement of certain Customs officials also. It is under those circumstances that the impugned show cause notice came to be served on the petitioner calling upon him to submit his explanation. Similar show cause notice had been issued to the three persons who had filed the Crl. O.Ps. before this Court and certain others also. The show cause notice is challenged on two grounds. (1) The first respondent who issued the show cause notice has no pecuniary jurisdiction to issue the notice having regard to Section 122 of the Customs Act which prescribes the pecuniary limit of the officers. The second ground ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... eous petitions, the decision of Raju, J. in W.P. No. 7839 of 1994 [reported in 1995 (76) E.L.T. 539 (Mad.)] was brought to my notice and I had decided to take up the writ petition itself for final disposal. At the request of the counsel for the petitioner, I gave one adjournment to enable the petitioner to argue the case, elaborately. 3.According to the learned counsel for the petitioner, the decision of Raju, J., dated 29-11-1994 will not apply to the facts of the present case. Further, the learned Judge has proceeded on the basis that the show cause notice had been issued under Section 122 of the Act, whereas the show cause notice actually related to initiation of adjudication proceedings. It was therefore contended that the views expre ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... has referred to Bailey or Jurisdiction. This is for the purpose of stating that while on the question of jurisdiction, the subject matter of the case has to be looked into. In other words, if the subject matter is looked into and if the value of the goods is more than Rs. 50,000/-, the show cause notice can be issued only by the Collector of Customs. Reference is then made to Rubinstein on Jurisdiction and Illegality. The argument is that the jurisdictional rule is applicable to the adjudicating proceeding also. Therefore, it is sought to be inferred that the issuance of a show cause notice is also part of the adjudication process and therefore part of the jurisdictional issue. In Rajmal Motiram Marvadi v. Krishna Valad Mahipati Hagadekar ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Court can infer mala fides for invalidating the show cause notice. 5.Per contra, Mr. C.A. Sundaram, learned counsel for the respondents refers to Section 2(39) of the Act which defines "smuggling". It means, any act or omission which will render the goods liable to confiscation under Section 111 or Section 113. According to the learned counsel, the provisions of the Act as contained in Chapter 14 come into play only where there is smuggling. As already pointed out, Section 113 provides for confiscation of goods attempted to be improperly exported. Section 122 refers only to the question of the adjudicating process and the limits of the officers. But it is only Section 124 which says that before confiscating the goods or imposing any penal ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... otice that any Rule prescribes that the Accountant General, who is the appointing authority, alone could have initiated a departmental proceeding." 6.It appears to me that there is no escape from the proposition that a show cause notice can be issued by the first respondent, but the adjudication can be done only by the authority prescribed under Section 122 of the Act. To some extent this is, in pari materia, to a case of disciplinary proceeding. In disciplinary proceedings also, it is stated that the punishment can be imposed by the appointing authority or some other authority prescribed by the Rule. That would not prevent a lower authority from initiating the disciplinary proceeding so long as the Rule does not prescribe the same. In th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... and one does not overlap the other. This is the view expressed by Venkataswami, J. (as he then was) in N. Jayathilakan v. Additional Secretary [1987 (31) E.L.T. 47]. That apart, I am also of the view that the issuance of the show cause notice will not absolve any Customs Officer who is found to be involved in the case and who is implicated by the C.B.I. authorities. Conversely the fact that the C.B.I. authorities implicate some Customs Officers as being involved in the case, will not absolve the petitioner or the other persons against whom show cause notices have been issued. 8.In fine, I find that there is no substance in the writ petition and it is accordingly dismissed. There will be no order as to costs. - - TaxTMI - TMITax - Cust ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
