PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT, CHANDIGARH. **** CWP NO. 10370 OF 2009. DATE OF DECISION: 20.07.2009. *** M/S Harkaran Dass Ved Pal Vs. Union of India and others. *** Coram: Hon'ble Mr. Justice T.S.Thakur,CJ and Hon'ble Mr. Justice Kanwaljit Singh Ahluwalia. *** Present: Shri Jagmohan Bansal, Advocate, for the petitioner. *** T.S.Thakur, CJ (Oral) A show cause notice does not determine any right or obligation. It simply provides an opportunity to the party concerned to offer an explanation to the action proposed against him. That is precisely what has happened in the present case also. By the notice impugned in this petition, the petitioner has been called upon to show cause why goods imported and cleared on provisional assessment basis under Sectiom 18 of the Customs Act, 1962 vide various bills of entry referred to in the said notice should not be assessed and amount of duty payable on the same finalized by taking the actual assessable value given in the notice. It also calls upon the petitioner to show cause why the declared value of the goods imported and cleared vide Bills of Entry in CFS, Ludhiana should not be rejected and Customs Duty amounting to Rs. 5000141/- detailed in the annexures to the notice recovered along with interest due thereon. The show cause notice further calls upon the petitioner to explain as to why penalty under Section 112(a)/114-A of the Customs Act, 1962 should not be imposed upon the petitioner for its acts of omission and commission. We have heard learned counsel for the parties. It is not in dispute that the Additional Director General the authority issuing the show cause notice is legally competent to do so.What CWP NO. 10370 OF 2009. -2- was argued on behalf of the petitioner was that the notice was qua certain bills of entries covered by an earlier investigation unjustified as the value declared in those bills of entry had been accepted. We do not in the present proceedings propose to go into the merits of that contention which the petitioner is in our opinion free to urge before the competent authority. What is important is that the show cause notice issued to the petitioner is within the jurisdiction of the authority issuing the same . That being so we see no reason why the petitioner should not respond to the show cause notice and point out all such legal and factual aspects as are according to it a good defence against the action proposed in the notice. The petitioner has not done so. He has instead rushed to this Court challenging the notice on a ground that does not touch the jurisdiction of the authority issuing the notice. We regret our inability to interfere in such a situation. It is also note-worthy that the provisions of the Act provide complete machinery for adjudication of all issues touching the rights or liabilities sought to be brought up for determination in this petition. If upon hearing the petitioner and after considering the explanation offered by it, the competent authority arrives at a conclusion to its prejudice, the petitioner shall be free to seek appropriate redress in the manner provided under the Act. In the result, this petition fails and is hereby dismissed. This order shall not however be taken as expressing any opinion on the merits of the contentions which shall be open to the petitioner before the authorities below. (T.S.Thakur) Chief Justice July 20, 2009 (Kanwaljit Singh Ahluwalia) Malik Judge