SHREE GANESH STEEL ROLLING MILLS LIMITED Vs. COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS SEAPORT IMPORT CUSTOM HOUSE CHENNAI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Mr. R.Yashod Varadan, learned Senior Counsel, leading Mr. B.Sathish Sundar, learned Counsel appearing for the Petitioner and M/S.K.Ravi Anantha Padmanaban, learned Standing Counsel for the Customs Department / Respondent.

(2.) The writ Petitioner challenges the show cause notice, dated 31.03.2005. By the show cause notice the Additional Director General, Customs, asked the Petitioner as to why action should not be taken against them under the Customs Act, 1962. The show cause notice also indicated that they should file a reply along with necessary documentary evidence and if No. reply is given the matter will be adjudicated and they were also requested to state whether they wish to be heard in person. It is also stated that they were asked to show why penalty should not be imposed on them under Section 112(a) of the Customs Act, 1962.

(3.) The Petitioner filed before this Court four writ petitions, being W.P. Nos. 5700 to 5703 of 2005. In those writ petitions, the Petitioner sought permission for drawing samples and for securing test report for the goods under detention and also to release the goods pertaining to the Bills of Entries. The writ petitions were disposed of by a common order, dated 11.04.2005. While disposing of the said writ petitions, this Court observed that after the show cause notice, they have also sent a reply and they are entitled to point out the deficiencies in the report of the National Metallurgical Laboratory (NML) and if they are really aggrieved by the assessment, they can always challenge the same and there is No. necessary to release the goods pending provisional assessment. As against the same, writ appeals in W.A. Nos. 832 to 835 of 2005 were filed before this Court and the same were disposed of by a common judgment, dated 22.07.2005. The said Writ Appeals judgment is since reported in 2006 (206) E.L.T. 76 (Mad.). In the said writ appeals, this Court has held that challenge to the show cause notice was premature and they should face adjudication. It was thereafter they filed Miscellaneous Petition Nos. 1822 to 1825 of 2006 seeking for recall of the order passed by this Court in terms of the observations made by the Supreme Court. The Subsequent Division Bench by an order dated 01.12.2006 disposed of those Miscellaneous Petitions and recalled the earlier order, both the writ petitions and writ appeals and the Petitioner was directed to make submissions before the authorities concerned after getting samples from the detained goods and re-test the same in accordance with the notification dated 21.05.1955. It is claimed that they got the test done by MSME Testing Centre and the test report given by them dated 21.04.2009 showed the sample as Non-Alloy Steel Slabs. On the strength of the said test report they have now come forward to challenge the original show cause notice, dated 31.03.2005.