Page 161 - ELT_2nd_15th April 2020_Vol 372_Part

2020 ] VEDANTA LIMITED v. UNION OF INDIA 207

and propriety of the Impugned Order dated 23-9-2019, be pleased to
quash and set aside the same;
(c) This Hon’ble Court be pleased to issue a Writ of mandamus, or a
Writ in the nature of mandamus, or any other appropriate Writ, or-
der or directions, directing the Respondents by their servants,
agents and subordinates to grant the exemption from Export duty
on iron ore where the Fe content (when computed on WMT basis) is
less than 58%, without any further delay and within a reasonable
timeframe, as deemed fit by this Hon’ble Court;
(d) Pending the hearing and final disposal of this Petition, this Hon’ble
Court may be pleased to restrain the Respondents from recovery of
demand raised in the impugned Order dated 23-9-2019 be stayed.
(e) For interim reliefs in terms of prayer clauses (a), (b) and (c) above.
(f) For ad interim reliefs in terms of prayer clauses (a), (b) and (c) above.
(g) For costs of this Petition and orders thereon. ”
4. Mr. Dada, the Learned Senior Advocate for the Petitioner submits
that the impugned letter dated 23-9-2019, which demanded duty from the Peti-
tioner, makes specific reference and relies upon the general Alert Circular No.
02/2019, dated 15-4-2019, issued by the Directorate of Revenue Intelligence
(DRI). He submits that despite the request, copy of such general alert Certificate
No. 2/2019 was never furnished to the Petitioners. He submits that in all proba-
bilities, the alert Circular No. 2/2019 contains instructions requiring the adjudi-
cating authority to decide the matter in a particular manner. He submits that the
adjudicating authority, being a quasi-judicial authority, no such instructions can
be issued to it by any authority and, in any case, the adjudicating authority must
not rely upon any such instructions. Mr. Dada submits that no personal hearing
was afforded to the Petitioner, even though the same was requested before issu-
ance of the impugned letter dated 23-9-2019. Mr. Dada submits that this is a clear
case of violation of the principles of natural justice and fair play and, therefore,
the impugned letter dated 23-9-2019 may be interfered with, without requiring
the Petitioner to avail of any alternate remedy that may be available under the
provisions of the Customs Act, 1962.
5. Ms. Asha Desai, Learned Standing Counsel for the Respondents re-
fers to para 2 of the Affidavit-in-reply filed by Shri B. Ajay Kumar, Assistant
Commissioner of Customs, which reads as follows :
“2. I say that with reference to para 3 of the impugned Alert Circular
01/2019, dated 15-4-2019 issued by the respondent No. 4 is an internal
communication and administrative nature. The final assessment Order dat-
ed 23-9-2019 issued by the respondent No. 2 erroneously refers to the alert
circular. Further, the petitioner had requested for personal hearing which
also appears from the order that it was not given. Therefore, if the matter is
remanded back on hearing the petitioner the matter will be adjudicated on
merits without reference to alert circular.”
6. Ms. Desai submits that without prejudice, if the impugned letter dat-
ed 23rd September, 2019, is set aside and the matter is remanded to the adjudi-
cating authority for afresh adjudication, after afford of personal hearing to the
Petitioner, then, the adjudicating authority will adjudicate the matter on its own
EXCISE LAW TIMES  15th April 2020  177