Lost Time and Fading Claims: Gujarat HC Echoes Pink Floyd in Verdict

Gandhinagar: The Gujarat High Court quashed two show cause notices (SCNs) issued by the customs department to a chemical manufacturing company, citing an "inordinate lapse of time" for their pending adjudication.

The court quoted the famous lyrics from Pink Floyd's "Time" in its judgment, stating, "Ten years have got behind you..." to highlight the delay in resolving the case.

Also read | Supreme Court Refuses to Entertain Plea Against Allahabad HC Judgement 'Grabbing Breasts Not Attempt to Rape'

The two notices, dating back to 2010 and 2011, had been unresolved for over 13 and 15 years, respectively, leading the division bench of Justice Bhargav Karia and Justice DN Ray to set them aside.

"The impugned SCNs have remained pending for more than 15 years and 13 years, respectively. Considering the aforesaid decisions, this Court has no hesitation in holding that due to an inordinately long lapse of time , the impugned show cause notices dated 08.03.2010 and 03.11.2011 can no longer remain pending for adjudication and must be quashed and set aside on that score alone. Accordingly, the petition succeeds and the impugned Show Cause Notices F No.DRI/AZU/INV45/2009 dated 08.03.2010 and 03.11.2011 are hereby quashed and set aside," the bench observed.

The bench further pointed out that given the extended period that had passed without any decision, it was not feasible for the notices to remain pending.

The case surrounded a chemical manufacturing company that was engaged in the export of synthetic dyes. In 2009, the Directorate of Revenue Intelligence (DRI) searched the company’s premises, alleging mis-declaration of exported products. Based on the findings, the customs department issued show cause notices accusing the company of wrongfully availing benefits under the Duty Entitlement Pass Book (DEPB) scheme.

Also read | Don’t Deserve Judge With Questionable Image: Calcutta HC Bar Association Question Transfer of Delhi HC judge to

However,  the company refuted the allegations, arguing that there had been no misdeclaration, and submitted clarifications regarding the chemical composition of the products in question.

Despite the Foreign Trade Development Authorities ruling in favor of the company on a similar issue, the customs department failed to adjudicate the matter within a reasonable time frame.

The court observed that even after personal hearings were held in 2012, the matter remained unresolved. Referring to a previous case, the court noted the importance of timely adjudication in such matters.

Thus, the court ruled in favor of the petitioner, quashing both SCNs based solely on the undue delay.