Home Case Index All Cases Service Tax Service Tax + HC Service Tax - 2015 (7) TMI HC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2015 (7) TMI 31 - HC - Service TaxChallenge to legality and validity of demand notice -Initiation of recovery proceedings with out relying on earlier decision on the same matter i.e Circular No.967 /01/2013-CX dated 1.1.2013 declared non east by the court 8 months back - Contempt petition against excise Assistant Commissioner - Held that:- With the legal position having been concluded by this Court more than 8 months back in the case of Manglam Cement Ltd. v. The Superintendent, Central Excise Range-III, Kota & Ors [2013 (4) TMI 102 - RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT] dated 01-3-2013 ; and in no uncertain terms, this Court having pronounced the Circular in question “non est” insofar relating to the situation where the stay applications remain pending in the appellate fora, it sounds rather strange that the concerned Assistant Commissioner, Central Excise Division, Udaipur has at all chosen to issue the questioned notice on the basis of the same Circular. Prima facie, the aforesaid demand notice dated 12-9-2013 (Annex. ‘F’) as also the communication dated 3/7-10-2013 (Annex. ‘J’) are of a show of total disrespect to and defiance of the order passed by this Court. The order passed by this Court on 1-3-2013, both in its letter as also in its spirit, leaves nothing to doubt or guess that this Court has pronounced the impugned Circular dated 1-1-2013 non est in relation to the situation as obtaining in the present case. Any attempt to yet initiate to coercive proceedings on the basis of the this very Circular gives rise to serious questions on the approach and intentions of the respondents. Having regard to the circumstances, we feel impelled that even while admitting this writ petition and staying operation of the impugned order, a notice be issued to the Assistant Commissioner, Central Excise Division, Udaipur and the Additional Commissioner (Recovery), Central Excise Commissionerate, Jaipur-II to show cause as to why the proceedings for having committed contempt of the order of this Court dated 1-3-2013 as passed in DBCWP No. 1891/2013 be not initiated. - Stay granted.
|