Home Case Index All Cases Central Excise Central Excise + HC Central Excise - 2019 (6) TMI HC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2019 (6) TMI 1068 - HC - Central ExciseRecovery of penalty against the company/ partnership firm - Cenvat Credit - Application seeking to vacate the interim relief - HELD THAT:- The present application has been preferred on absolute misreading of the decision of the Supreme Court in Asian Resurfacing of Road Agency Pvt. Ltd. and another vs. Central Bureau of Investigation [2018 (4) TMI 3 - SUPREME COURT], more particularly, the observations made in paras 34 and 35 referred to above. The observations of the Supreme Court with regard to continuation of any interim order beyond the period of six months in any civil or criminal proceedings arising from a trial fell altogether in a different context. The observations made in the decision of the Supreme Court in the context of Civil and Criminal litigation cannot be made applicable in a Tax Appeal. An identical issue fell for the consideration of a Division Bench of the High Court of Bombay in the case of ORACLE FINANCIAL SERVICES SOFTWARE LTD, MUMBAI VERSUS DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-13 (1) (1) & ORS. [2019 (3) TMI 1320 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT], where it was held that power of the Assessing Officer to review the situation every six months, would not authorize him to lift the stay previously granted after full consideration and insist on full payment of tax without the assessee being responsible for delay in disposal of the appeal or any other such similar material change in circumstances. There is no good reason to vacate the interim order passed by this court. If the Revenue is so much concerned about the interim relief which is operating in favour of the assessee, than it should take necessary steps to see that the Tax Appeal is taken up for final hearing - application dismissed.
|