Bombay High Court Quashes Show Cause Notice in Customs Case Due to 24-Year Delay in Adjudication. Inordinate delay in adjudication of show cause notice under Section 28 of Customs Act, 1962 renders it stale and liable to be quashed as abuse of process.

High Court: Bombay High Court Bench: BOMBAY In Favour of Accused
  • 4
Judgement Image
Font size:
Print

Case Note & Summary

The petitioners, Rachana Garments Pvt. Ltd. and its director Dinesh Kumar Bhartiya, challenged a show cause notice dated 27 June 1997 issued by the Commissioner of Customs (Preventive) under Section 28 of the Customs Act, 1962. The notice pertained to alleged duty demands arising from exports made by M/s. Rachana Enterprises, a partnership firm, which was later taken over by Petitioner No.1. The petitioners initially raised two grounds: lack of jurisdiction and staleness due to non-adjudication for 24 years. However, at hearing, they pressed only the second ground. The petitioners had filed replies and attended personal hearings, but the notice remained unadjudicated. The court found that the inordinate delay of 24 years, without any explanation from the respondents, rendered the notice stale and an abuse of process. The court quashed the show cause notice, holding that the respondents cannot keep the notice alive indefinitely and that the delay violated principles of natural justice. The petition was allowed with no order as to costs.

Headnote

A) Customs Law - Show Cause Notice - Delay in Adjudication - Section 28 Customs Act, 1962 - Petitioners challenged a show cause notice dated 27/06/1997 on ground of inordinate delay of 24 years in adjudication despite filing replies and attending hearings - Court held that such delay renders the notice stale and an abuse of process, and quashed the notice - Held that the respondents cannot be allowed to keep the notice alive indefinitely (Paras 3-16).

Subscribe to unlock Headnote Subscribe Now

Issue of Consideration

Whether a show cause notice under Section 28 of the Customs Act, 1962, not adjudicated for 24 years despite replies and personal hearings, should be quashed on ground of staleness and abuse of process.

Subscribe to unlock Issue of Consideration Subscribe Now

Final Decision

Petition allowed. Show cause notice dated 27/06/1997 quashed and set aside. No order as to costs.

Law Points

  • Inordinate delay in adjudication of show cause notice renders it stale and liable to be quashed
  • abuse of process of law
  • principles of natural justice
  • Section 28 Customs Act
  • 1962
Subscribe to unlock Law Points Subscribe Now

Case Details

2022 LawText (BOM) (08) 64

Writ Petition Lodging No.11860 of 2021

2022-08-04

K. R. Shriram, A.S. Doctor

Mr. D. B. Shroff, Senior Advocate a/w Mr. Prakash Shah, Mr. Anil Balani and Mr. Jas Sanghavi i/by Mr. Devraj Kansara for Petitioners; Mr. Amit Singh for Respondent No.1; Ms. Maya Majumdar for Respondent No.2

Rachana Garments Pvt. Ltd. & Anr.

Commissioner of Customs (Preventive) & Ors.

Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more) Subscribe Now

Nature of Litigation

Writ petition challenging show cause notice under Customs Act, 1962

Remedy Sought

Quashing of show cause notice dated 27/06/1997

Filing Reason

Show cause notice not adjudicated for 24 years despite replies and hearings

Issues

Whether show cause notice under Section 28 of Customs Act, 1962, not adjudicated for 24 years, should be quashed on ground of staleness and abuse of process.

Submissions/Arguments

Petitioners argued that the show cause notice has become stale due to inordinate delay of 24 years in adjudication, despite filing replies and attending personal hearings. Respondents did not offer any explanation for the delay.

Ratio Decidendi

Inordinate delay in adjudication of a show cause notice, without any explanation, renders the notice stale and an abuse of process, warranting quashing.

Judgment Excerpts

Petitioners are challenging a show cause notice dated 27/06/1997 issued by Respondent No.1 on the ground that... the show cause notice, not having been adjudicated by Respondent No.2 and/or his predecessors for a period of 24 years, although Petitioners have filed replies and attended personal hearing, has become stale and has to be quashed and set aside. Mr. Shroff pressed this second ground only and did not make any submission on the first.

Procedural History

Show cause notice issued on 27/06/1997. Petitioners filed replies and attended personal hearings. No adjudication for 24 years. Writ petition filed in 2021 challenging the notice.

Acts & Sections

  • Customs Act, 1962: Section 28
Subscribe to unlock full Legal Analysis Subscribe Now
Related Judgement
High Court Bombay High Court Quashes Show Cause Notice in Customs Case Due to 24-Year Delay in Adjudication. Inordinate delay in adjudication of show cause notice under Section 28 of Customs Act, 1962 renders it stale and liable to be quashed as abuse of proces...
Related Judgement
High Court Bombay High Court Directs Caste Scrutiny Committee to Decide Tribe Claim Within Six Months — Services Protected Pending Decision. The Court ordered protection of petitioner's services pending verification of his Scheduled Tribe claim by the Scrutin...