Verbatim Reproduction of Contents of SCN in Customs Final Order, No Independent Reasoning: Madras HC sets aside Order [Read Order]

The petitioners, against whom penalties were imposed under Section 112(a) & (b) of the Customs Act, 1962 in connection with a gold smuggling case, contended that the adjudicating authority had cut, copied, and pasted the SCN into the final order without addressing their replies.

Practical Case Studies in Forensic Accounting & Corporate Fraud Investigation - Click Here

Justice Abdul Quddhose, hearing the writ petitions, noted that while the adjudicating authority had acknowledged receipt of replies in some cases, the impugned order neither considered nor gave reasons for rejecting them.

The Court referred to the Supreme Court ruling in UPSC v. Bibhu Prasad Sarangi, which held that copy-paste orders without independent reasons undermine judicial discipline as “reasons are the soul of a decision.”

Know Practical Aspects of Tax Planning, Click Here

A comparison chart placed on record demonstrated that large portions of the impugned order were verbatim reproductions of the SCN. The Court also observed that gold was not seized from the petitioners but from another individual, and the adjudicating authority had failed to deal with their specific defences.

The court, holding that the order violated principles of natural justice, quashed the adjudication order insofar as it applied to the petitioners and remanded the matter to the Commissioner of Customs for fresh consideration.

The bench directed that a reasoned order be passed within four months after affording fair hearing, while clarifying that no opinion was expressed on merits.

Support our journalism by subscribing to Taxscan premium. Follow us on Telegram for quick updates