TMI Blog2006 (12) TMI 203X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... - writ petition restored to high court - 5295 of 2006 - - - Dated:- 1-12-2006 - S.B. Sinha and Markandey Katju, JJ. REPRESENTED BY : S/Shri Harish N. Salve, Sr. Advocate, Prakash Shah, Jay Savla and Ms. Reena Bagga, Advocates with him, for the Appellant. S/Shri Vinay Navare, Naresh Kumar, A.P. Mayee and V.N. Raghupathy, Advocates, for the Respondent. [Judgment per : S.B. Sinha, J.]. - Leave granted. 2. Whether the High Court in exercise of its jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India would interfere with a demand directing payment of cess is in question in this appeal which arises out of a judgment and order dated 8-7-2005 passed by a Division Bench of the High Court of Judicature at Bombay in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 5. By reason of a purported show cause notice, the appellant was directed to make payment of cess with interest immediately in respect of the purported supplies made to Navi Mumbai parties right from 1-6-1996. It was, however, stated : "You are also requested to attend at above address at 11.00 a.m. on 4-7-05 hearing. I am enclosing herewith the photocopies of the bills raised by Aurangabad Daman divisions to the Navi Mumbai Vendees." 6. A writ petition was filed by the appellant herein questioning the said purported notice. By reason of the impugned order, the High Court refused to exercise its jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India stating : "Challenge is to a show cause notice issued by the Corporat ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ism used by the parties to avoid payment of Cess on the said import of goods, what is the extent of Cess that is evaded as a result of such mechanism and who ultimately can be held responsible both for the purposes of recovery as also for the purpose of penalty..." 8. It was further asserted : "...I say that it is well known that under the Bombay Provincial Municipal Corporation (Cess on Entry of Goods) Rules, 1996 goods purchased from registered dealers are not subject to Cess. I say that in this view of the fact the entire nature of the transactions, to which the petitioner also was party, need to be examined and scrutinized from the perspective of recovery of cess and identification of liability. I say that if the petitioner ha ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... affidavit as also in its purported show cause. 11. The said principle has been followed by this Court in V.C. Banaras Hindu University and Ors. v. Shrikant [2006 (6) SCALE 66], stating : "The Vice Chancellor appears to have made up his mind to impose the punishment of dismissal on the Respondent herein. A post decisional hearing given by the High Court was illusory in this case. In K.I. Shephard Ors. etc. etc. v. Union of India Ors. [AIR 1988 SC 686], this Court held : "...It is common experience that once a decision has been taken, there is tendency to uphold it and a representation may not really yield any fruitful purpose." [See also Shri Shekhar Ghosh v. Union of India Anr., 2006 (11) SCALE 363 and Rajesh Kumar O ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
