M/S.Alfas Trading International Private Limited vs. The Joint Commissioner Of Customs (Appraising Imports)

Held

The Court held that the petitioner's first ground, regarding the competency of the authority issuing the Show Cause Notice (SCN), was not maintainable. The petitioner had not raised this objection before the adjudication authority and only raised it for the first time before the High Court. Furthermore, the challenge was to the Order in Original, which was passed by the competent authority (Joint Commissioner of Customs), and the petitioner did not claim that the Order in Original itself was passed by an incompetent authority. Regarding the second ground, concerning limitation, the Court found no merit. For the bill of entry dated 24.04.2020, the Court noted that goods were cleared on 05.05.2020, making the SCN issued on 20.04.2022 well within the time limit. For other bills of entry, the Court accepted the revenue's argument that the limitation period under Section 28(9) should be counted from the date of the corrigendum SCN (15.10.2022), as an interim SCN was issued earlier and a corrigendum was necessary due to a change in adjudicating authority. The Court also observed that the issue was regarding short payment of customs duty due to wrong exemption claimed, implying a one-year limitation period, not six months as claimed by the petitioner. Therefore, the writ petition was dismissed.

Facts

The petitioner, M/s. Alfas Trading International Private Limited, imported Clear Float Glass under three bills of entry between April and June 2020. The goods were classified under CTH 70051090 and assessed with duty, claiming BCD exemption under Notification No. 46/2011-Customs (ASEAN). A post-clearance audit revealed misclassification; the goods should have been under CTH 70052990, attracting a 5% BCD instead of 0%, resulting in a short levy of Rs. 7,17,374/-. A Show Cause Notice (SCN) dated 20.04.2022 was issued by the Deputy Commissioner of Customs. Subsequently, a corrigendum was issued on 15.10.2022 for a change of adjudicating authority to the Joint Commissioner of Customs due to the monetary limit. The petitioner responded to the SCN and participated in personal hearings. The impugned Order in Original dated 25.07.2023 was passed by the Joint Commissioner of Customs, confirming the short-levied duty and interest.

Key Issues

1. Whether the Show Cause Notice dated 20.04.2022 was issued by a competent authority under the Customs Act, 1962, rendering the subsequent Order in Original without jurisdiction? The petitioner argued that the Deputy Commissioner of Customs, who issued the initial SCN, was not the competent authority to adjudicate short-levied customs duty on imports, making the subsequent order void. The revenue did not record any specific argument on this point, but the Court addressed it in its findings. 2. Whether the impugned Order in Original dated 25.07.2023 was passed beyond the limitation prescribed under Section 28(9) of the Customs Act, 1962? The petitioner contended that the SCN dated 20.04.2022 and the subsequent order dated 25.07.2023 were beyond the prescribed limitation periods, making the demand void. The revenue argued that the limitation period should be counted from the date of clearance of goods for one bill of entry and from the date of the corrigendum for others, and that the petitioner had not raised the competency issue earlier.