Delhi High Court
Mohammad Rafique vs The Commissioner Of Customs & Ors. on 24 February, 2025
Author: Prathiba M. Singh
Bench: Prathiba M. Singh
$~37 to 43
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Date of Decision: 24th February, 2025.
+ W.P.(C) 10758/2024 & CM APPL. 44291/2024
MOHAMMAD RAFIQUE .....Petitioner
Through: Mr. Tarun Gulati, Senior Advocate
with Mr. Puneet Agrawal, Mr. Yuvraj
Singh, Ms. Shruti Garg, Ms. Shruti &
Mr. Chetan Kumar Shukla, Advs.
versus
THE COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS & ORS. .....Respondents
Through: Mr. Harpreet Singh, Senior Standing
Counsel along with Mr. Jai Ahuja and
Ms. Suhani Mathur, Advs.
Mr. Sushil Raaja, Adv.
Mr. Harish Kumar Garg, Adv. for R-2.
38 WITH
+ W.P.(C) 10759/2024 & CM APPL. 44321/2024
MOHAMMED ABID .....Petitioner
Through: Mr. Tarun Gulati, Senior Advocate
with Mr. Puneet Agrawal, Mr. Yuvraj
Singh, Ms. Shruti Garg, Ms. Shruti &
Mr. Chetan Kumar Shukla, Advs.
versus
COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS & ORS. .....Respondents
Through: Mr. Harpreet Singh, Senior Standing
Counsel along with Mr. Jai Ahuja and
Ms. Suhani Mathur, Advs.
39 WITH
+ W.P.(C) 10769/2024 & CM APPL. 44337/2024
M/S LAXMI INDUSTRIAL CORPORATION & ANR......Petitioners
Through: Mr. Tarun Gulati, Senior Advocate
with Mr. Puneet Agrawal, Mr. Yuvraj
Singh, Ms. Shruti Garg, Ms. Shruti &
Mr. Chetan Kumar Shukla, Advs.
versus
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed
By:DHIRENDER KUMAR W.P.(C) 10758/2024 & connected matters Page 1 of 7
Signing Date:03.03.2025
13:16
THE COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS & ORS. .....Respondents
Through: Mr. Harpreet Singh, Senior Standing
Counsel along with Mr. Jai Ahuja and
Ms. Suhani Mathur, Advs.
40 WITH
+ W.P.(C) 10782/2024 & CM APPL. 44370/2024
M/S JAI DURGA ENTERPRISES & ANR. .....Petitioners
Through: Mr. Tarun Gulati, Senior Advocate
with Mr. Puneet Agrawal, Mr. Yuvraj
Singh, Ms. Shruti Garg, Ms. Shruti &
Mr. Chetan Kumar Shukla, Advs.
versus
THE COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS & ORS. .....Respondents
Through: Mr. Harpreet Singh, Senior Standing
Counsel along with Mr. Jai Ahuja and
Ms. Suhani Mathur, Advs.
41 WITH
+ W.P.(C) 10789/2024 & CM APPL. 44381/2024
M/S HASHMI IMPORTS P LTD. & ANR. .....Petitioners
Through: Mr. Tarun Gulati, Senior Advocate
with Mr. Puneet Agrawal, Mr. Yuvraj
Singh, Ms. Shruti Garg, Ms. Shruti &
Mr. Chetan Kumar Shukla, Advs.
Mr. Anurag Ojha, Sr. Standing
Counsel with Mr. Subham Kumar and
Mr. Dipak Raj, Advs. for Customs.
versus
THE COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS & ORS. .....Respondents
Through:
42 WITH
+ W.P.(C) 11034/2024 & CM APPL. 45599/2024
MOHAMMED ABID .....Petitioner
Through: Mr. Tarun Gulati, Senior Advocate
with Mr. Puneet Agrawal, Mr. Yuvraj
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed
By:DHIRENDER KUMAR W.P.(C) 10758/2024 & connected matters Page 2 of 7
Signing Date:03.03.2025
13:16
Singh, Ms. Shruti Garg, Ms. Shruti &
Mr. Chetan Kumar Shukla, Advs.
versus
THE COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS & ORS. .....Respondents
Through: Mr. Anurag Ojha, Sr. Standing
Counsel with Mr. Subham Kumar and
Mr. Dipak Raj, Advs. for R-1 & 5.
43 AND
+ W.P.(C) 11087/2024 & CM APPL. 45809/2024
SHIVINDER SINGH .....Petitioner
Through: Mr. Tarun Gulati, Senior Advocate
with Mr. Puneet Agrawal, Mr. Yuvraj
Singh, Ms. Shruti Garg, Ms. Shruti &
Mr. Chetan Kumar Shukla, Advs.
versus
COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS (EXPORTS)
& ORS. .....Respondents
Through: Mr. Harpreet Singh, Senior Standing
Counsel along with Mr. Jai Ahuja and
Ms. Suhani Mathur, Advs.
CORAM:
JUSTICE PRATHIBA M. SINGH
JUSTICE SAURABH BANERJEE
Prathiba M. Singh, J. (Oral)
1. This hearing has been done through hybrid mode.
2. The present writ petitions have been filed under Articles 226 and 227
of the Constitution of India inter alia seeking issuance of an appropriate writ
for quashing of the impugned Order-in-Original dated 26th March, 2024 and
(hereinafter "impugned Order-in-Original") the impugned Show Cause
Notice dated 20th June, 2012 (hereinafter "impugned SCN") issued by the
Respondent No. 1 - Commissioner of Customs, Inland Container Depot
(Export), Tughlakabad, New Delhi and Respondent No. 4 - Additional
Director General, Directorate of Revenue Intelligence, Delhi Zonal Unit,
respectively.
3. The brief facts of the case are that the Directorate of Revenue
Intelligence, Delhi Zonal Unit, (hereinafter "DRI"), on the basis of
intelligence received, suspected misdeclaration and undervaluation in the
import of rubber compound, un-vulcanized rubber compound and nylon
chords (hereinafter "subject goods") by two entities namely M/s. Y.K. Rubber
and M/s Hashmi Imports (P) Ltd. The said entities were believed to be under
the actual control of one Mr. Rafique i.e. the Petitioner in W.P.(C)
10758/2024. During the course of investigation, the DRI suspected that Mr.
Rafique was also using other firms. The said entities are Petitioners herein
and are captured in the impugned SCN in the following terms:
"7.0 From the investigations conducted so far it appears
to have been established that Shri Rafique imported
rubber compound in various firms and opened and used
other firms opened in the name of his relative and some
other firms as per the following details:
1. M/s Hashmi Import, Delhi: The proprietor of
this firm is Mohammad Abid brother of Shri
Rafique. This firm has been extensively used for
import of rubber compound by Shri Rafique.
2. M/s Y.K. Rubber, Delhi: The proprietor of this
firm is Mohammad Yakub, father of Shri Rafique.
This firm has also been used extensively for import
of rubber compound.
3. M/s LAxmi Industrial Corporation: The
proprietor of this firm is Shri Ashok Goyal.
4. M/s Jai Durga Enterprises. The proprietor of
this firm is Shri Rajesh who in his statement
admitted that he had opened the firm on the
instruction of Shri Rakesh Mangala
5. M/s Star International: The proprietor of this
firm is Shri Dayanand who in his statement
admitted to have opened the said firm on the
instruction of Rakesh Mangala."
4. The role ascribed to Mr. Shivinder Singh i.e., the Petitioner in W.P.(C)
11087/2024 is inter alia that he was an associate to Mr. Rafique who procured
goods from various suppliers and used to generate fake invoices at under-
valued prices by suppressing the actual transaction value and undervaluing
the imported goods. The role of Mr. Shivinder Singh is captured in the
impugned SCN in the following terms:
"14.4: Shri Shivinder Singh, an associate of Shri
Rafique, procured the goods from various suppliers and
used to generate fake invoices at under-valued prices by
suppressing the actual transaction value and-wilfully
undervaluing the imported goods covered under several
Bills of Entry, details of which are detailed in
Annexures-A-I, A-II.... to Annexure E to this SCN with
an intent to evade the Customs duty. Shri Shivinder
Singh admittedly had full knowledge about the mis-
declaration and under-valuation of the goods at the time
of their importation. He was involved in generating fake
invoices at the time of their importation. He was
involved in generating fake invoices at grossly
undervalued value rates and sending differential
amount through hawala channel. Shri Shivinder Singh,
knowingly & wilfullv imported the said goods from by
mis-declaring the actual value, as discussed in the
foregoing paras. Thus, Shri Shivinder Singh has done
various acts of omission & commission, which have
rendered the imported goods liable for confiscation
under Section 111 (m) of the Customs Act, 1962. Shri
Shivinder Singh knowingly and intentionally made,
signed and used and caused to be made, signed or used
false declarations, statements and documents viz.
creating fake invoices at grossly undervalued rate,
while making fraudulent imports with an intention to
evade Customs duty. Accordingly, he is liable to be
penalized under Section 112 (a) & (b) and Section 114
AA of the Customs Act, 1962."
5. On the basis of the allegations stated in the impugned SCN, the DRI
raised various demands against the Petitioners including interest and penalty.
The impugned SCN was however not adjudicated for a substantial period of
time by the concerned assessing authority.
6. The Petitioners in the present case are co-noticees of the impugned
SCN in the case titled Shri Rakesh Kumar Mangala & Anr. v. The
Commissioner of Customs Export & Ors. (2025:DHC:1015-DB).
7. Vide the said judgment, the same Show Cause Notice dated 20th June,
2012 and the order in original dated 26th March, 2024 has already been
quashed in the following terms:
"21. Thus, following the decisions discussed above,
the impugned SCN dated 20th June, 2012 deserves to be
quashed and is accordingly set aside.
22. Considering that the impugned SCN which
forms the basis for passing of the impugned Order-in-
Original dated 26th March, 2024 itself has been set
aide, the said impugned Order-in-Original cannot be
sustained and would not survive in terms of the settled
principles of law. Thus, the impugned Order-in-
Original also deserves to be quashed and is accordingly
set aside."
8. Thus, in terms of the said judgment, impugned Order-in-Original dated
26th March, 2024 and the impugned Show Cause Notice dated 20th June, 2012
are set aside even qua the present Petitioners.
9. In W.P.(C) 10759/2024, it is submitted that at the time when the
impugned show cause notice was issued, the firm was known as Y.K. Rubber,
which was a sole proprietary concern of the father of the present Petitioner -
Mohammed Abid. At the time when the order in original has been passed, the
father of the Petitioner - Mohammed Yakub had already passed away.
Accordingly, the benefit of this order shall ensure in favour of Mohammed
Abid.
10. Petitions are disposed of in these terms. All pending applications, if
any, are also disposed of.
PRATHIBA M. SINGH
JUDGE
SAURABH BANERJEE
JUDGE
FEBRUARY 24, 2025
Rahul/rks
