Heard Mr.Hari Radhakrishnan, learned Counsel for the petitioner and Ms.R.Hemalatha, learned Standing Panel Counsel for the respondent.
2. The petitioner has filed this writ petition for issuance of writ of mandamus to direct the first respondent to issue show cause notice with respect to the amount of customs duty payable by the petitioner. The reason for seeking such relief is on account of notice dated 30.08.2005 issued by the first respondent stated that the demand/show cause notice has already been issued to the petitioner for non-fulfillment of the export obligation against the advance licence dated 25.11.1983 directing the petitioner to pay duty along with interest. Further it has been stated that the issue has been discussed in the settlement commission twice on the applications filed by the petitioner and the petitioner had submitted that they would pay the duty and interest without further loss of time. As there were no valid grounds to entertain the applications for settlement, the same were rejected by the settlement commission and such order was confirmed, when the writ petition filed by the petitioner challenging the same in WP.No.707/2004 was dismissed. After setting out the above facts, the respondents stated that the question of issuance of show cause notice and commencing any adjudication proceedings does not arise and called upon the petitioner to pay the balance duty amount of Rs.7,53,375/- along with interest of Rs.59,07,544/- upto 21.08.2005 failing which, stated that action will be initiated under
Section 142 of the Customs Act 1962.
3. The learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner, during the course of arguments, fairly conceded that after the rejection of the application by the settlement commission, the petitioner was unsuccessful before this Court as the writ petition filed challenging the said order was also dismissed and as of now, the petitioner cannot insist upon issuance of show cause notice.
4. However, the learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the entire duty amount has already been paid and the petitioner may be granted one opportunity to make their submissions with regard to the claim for interest. In the affidavit filed in support of the petition, no such specific plea with regard to the leviability or non-leviability of interest has been raised by the petitioner. Nevertheless, since the writ petition has been pending from 2005, this Court of the view that the petitioner can be granted an opportunity by submitting a reply to the notice dated 30.08.2005, in so far as it demands interest.
5. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of by directing the petitioner to submit their reply notice to the notice dated 30.08.2005, with regard to the demand of interest, within a period of 15 days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order and on receipt of the same, the first respondent shall consider the same and pass orders on merits and accordance with law.
6. With the above directions, this writ petition is disposed of. The interim order directing the matter to be kept in abeyance stands vacated and the first respondent is directed to proceed in accordance with law. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.
07.09.2017 sai\nv T.S.SIVAGNANAM, J.
sai/nv To
1.Deputy Commissioner of Customs GR.7 DFRC DEEC Custom House, No.33, Rajaji Salai, Chennai -1.
2.Commissioner of Customs, Custom House, No.33, Rajaji Salai, Chennai -1.
3.Additional Director General of Foreign Trade, Room No.12, Udyog Bhavan, New Delhi 110 011.
WP.No.29570 of 2017 Dated: 07.09.2017