Back
R. MAHADEVAN, J. SATHYA NARAYANA PRASAD
Lalchand Bhimraj rep. by its partner Vimal Chand Bhandari – Appellant
Versus
Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal South Zone Bench, Chennai – Respondent
JUDGMENT
(Prayer: Petitions filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for a issuance of writ of Certiorari calling for the records of the respondents culminating in order dated 11.10.2004, bearing Nos.940 & 939 of 2004 in Appeal No.C/84 of 2002 & C/83 of 2002 passed by the first respondent and quash the same.)
Common Order:
R. Mahadevan, J.
The relief sought in these writ petitions is to issue a Writ of Certiorari calling for the records from the file of the first respondent, pertaining to the Final order Nos.940 & 939 of 2004 dated 11.10.2004, in Appeal Nos.C/84/2002 & C/83/2002 and quash the same.
2. The brief facts of the case are as follows:
2.1. The petitioner firm has imported three consignments of ascorbic acid to be used in the manufacture of medicines vide bills of entry bearing Nos.14797 dated 26.05.2000, 12032 dated 04.05.2000 & 25633 dated 28.08.2000. The said imported consignments were subjected to customs duty, which was paid by the petitioner on 01.06.2000, 09.05.2000 & 04.09.2000 respectively. On payment of duty by the petitioner, the
The date of despatch of notices alone will be taken into account for limitation, and the doctrine of substantial compliance was applied to the facts and circumstances of the case.
Section 148 of the Act denotes 'issue of notice where income has escaped assessment'. Once the Assessing Officer has reason to believe that any income chargeable to tax has escaped assessment, then h....
Proceedings under section 11A of Act are adjudicatory proceedings and authority which decides same is a quasi-judicial authority. Such proceedings are strictly governed by statutory provisions. Secti....
Show cause notices issued prior to 29.03.2018 must be adjudicated within one year from that date; otherwise, they lapse.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the interpretation of the applicability of directives issued by the Central Board of Indirect Taxes and Customs under Section 28(9A)(c) of the Cust....
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the show cause notice under the Custom Act, 1962 was not time barred, based on the analysis of relevant provisions and legal principles.
Delay in adjudication of show cause notices is a violation of principles of natural justice.
Delayed adjudication attributable to the revenue violates procedural fairness and the principles of natural justice.
The limitation period for issuing show cause notices under Section 28(9)(a) of the Customs Act, 1962 is mandatory, and failure to conduct pre-notice consultation renders the proceedings void.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
