Page 253 - ELT_15th June 2020_VOL 372_Part 6th

2020 ] SUBJECT INDEX 899
Adjudication (Contd.)
violative of natural justice - Accepting petitioner’s request, Revenue
directed to furnish him a copy of aforesaid Alert Circular within 7 days -
Thereafter petitioner shall submit reply to Show Cause Notice within
next seven days and case would be adjudicated by Adjudicating
Authority on its own merits without being influenced by said circular -
Section 122A of Customs Act, 1962 - Article 226 of Constitution of India
— Vedanta Limited v. Union of India (Bom.) ........................ 206
— Scope of - It is not restricted to facts elicited in investigation - It can fill
missing gaps - However, opportunity has to be given for
defence/counter for what was not stated in show cause notice — S.
Muthusamy v. Addl. Director General (Adj.), D.R.I., Mumbai (Tri. - Mumbai) ......... 849
— Show Cause Notice, non-issuance of - Ex parte order - Notwithstanding
that appellant had waived show cause notice, such waiver was in respect
of enhancement of value based on NIDB data - No notice was issued by
department showing intention to Confiscate goods on the ground of
misdeclaration - Accordingly appellant could not make his defence on
this issue - Setting aside impugned ex parte order, matter remanded to
adjudicating authority for de novo adjudication - Section 122A of
Customs Act, 1962 — SGI Corporation v. Commissioner of Customs-Kandla, Gujarat
(Tri. - Ahmd.) ...................................... 380
— Show cause notices issued on same issue answerable to different
adjudicating authority to be transferred and adjudicated by the officer
competent to decide the case involving higher duty - Show cause notice,
dated 2-5-2017 involving Cenvat credit of ` 12.86 crores issued and
adjudicated by Commissioner, Alwar required to be transferred to
ADGCEI, New Delhi for analogous adjudication with the show cause
notice issued by him on the same issue involving higher amount in view
of Clause 11.2 of C.B.E. & C. Master Circular No. 1053/2/2017-CX, dated
10-3-2017 - Sections 33 and 33A of Central Excise Act, 1944 — Sypher Impex
Alloys Pvt. Ltd. v. Union of India (Raj.) ........................... 46
Adjudication order - Delay of 6 months between hearing and
pronouncement of order - Such order having been passed without
considering the provision of law properly and the affidavit of petitioner
placing certain factual position on record supported by decisions of
Tribunal, which is attributable to the delay happened in its passing, not
sustainable as the same has caused prejudice to the petitioner - Matter
directed to be adjudicated afresh by adjudicating authority - Sections 122
and 122A of Customs Act, 1962 — Infra Dredge Services Pvt. Ltd. v. Union of India
(Bom.) ......................................... 691
— of re-export of goods on payment of redemption fine not sustainable - See
under REDEMPTION FINE ............................ 442
Adjudication proceedings - Methodology - Challenge in Writ proceedings -
Show Cause Notice with regard to seizure of Gold Bars has already been
issued and adjudication proceedings have already begin - Thus
petitioner’s challenge for correction of methodology of adjudication,
cannot be accepted at all - No interference is called for in discretion of
adjudication authority who is expected to complete adjudication
proceedings by following law, rules, regulations and Government policy
as well as judicial precedents as applicable to facts of case -
Notwithstanding, if any daily orders are passed, a copy of same be
supplied to petitioner if sought - Section 122A of Customs Act, 1962 -
Article 226 of Constitution of India — Narendra Kumar Jain v. Dinesh Meena, Joint
Commr., Cus. (Preventive) (Del.) ............................. 247
EXCISE LAW TIMES  15th June 2020  253