Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

Home Case Index All Cases Central Excise Central Excise + HC Central Excise - 1996 (11) TMI HC This

  • Login
  • Summary

Forgot password       New User/ Regiser

⇒ Register to get Live Demo



 

1996 (11) TMI 78 - HC - Central Excise

Issues:
Challan as a demand for excise duty, violation of natural justice in issuing challan without assessment under Section 11 of the Central Excises and Salt Act.

Analysis:
The case involved three writ petitions seeking to quash a challan for excise duty assessment and return of seized documents. The petitioner, a manufacturer of aluminium circles, claimed exemption under a General Notification. The third respondent conducted a search and seized documents, directing the petitioner to pay duty without assessment. The petitioner argued that the challan itself constituted a demand, violating natural justice and lacking initiation under Section 11 of the Act.

The petitioner contended that the challan served as a demand for excise duty. However, the court found that the challan did not explicitly contain a demand or consequences for non-payment. The absence of specific language indicating a demand or penalty rendered the petitioner's argument unconvincing. The court highlighted the necessity of clearly notifying individuals of any potential civil or penal repercussions for non-compliance with directions or orders.

Regarding the violation of natural justice, the court emphasized that without a clear indication of civil or criminal consequences for non-payment in the challan, there was no breach of natural justice principles. The petitioner's apprehension of facing penalties for non-payment was deemed unwarranted. The court underscored the importance of initiating proceedings under Section 11A of the Act, which requires issuing a notice and conducting an inquiry before further action.

The Additional Central Government Standing Counsel argued that the challan did not signify a demand, and proceedings were yet to commence under Section 11A. The court agreed, dismissing the writ petitions. It clarified that if there were any violations of the Act or principles of natural justice during future proceedings, the petitioner could seek appropriate relief through the court. The dismissal of the writ petitions was accompanied by no order as to costs, concluding the judgment.

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates