TMI Blog1992 (7) TMI 173X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ded by the Collector in his order. When the stay application came up for hearing on 3rd February, 1992, the learned JCDR s request for adjournment was allowed and the matter was adjourned to 9th March, 1992. An extract from the order significant is as under :- 3. At this stage, Shri Sanjay Grover, learned Counsel, submitted that the issue involved in the present appeal is squarely covered in favour of the applicants by a decision rendered by this Tribunal in the case of Steel Authority of India Limited v. Collector of Central Excise, 1991 (54) E.L.T. 414, and, therefore, interim stay maybe granted. From the record we find that no coercive process has been issued by the Collector. Under these circumstances, we instead of passing any inter ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e any amounts were legitimately recoverable from an assessee, the same should be recovered by the Department in terms of the powers vested upon them in the Act, and debit entries cannot be made by any officer in the books of accounts of an assessee himself. Such action has been held to be illegal. The prayer made in the application is to direct the Superintendent to reverse the aforesaid debit entry in the RG-23A Part II Account. 4. When Shri A.N. Haksar, the learned Counsel of the appellant company first mentioned the matter on 7th July before the Bench, we had directed that the matter should be placed along with the file on 10th July. A copy was handed over to the learned SDK Smt. Ananya Ray. But when the matter came up on that day, it ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... iterated the prayer for reversal of the debit. 6. We have given our anxious consideration to the matter and feel distressed that not only should the authorities have unilaterally debited the account, even the learned JCDR has not been able to render us the assistance which was sought from him in the form of a report from the Collector. We expected greater attention from him in a matter of such importance. The two cases cited before us leave no doubt in our mind that the raising of the debit in the account in the manner it was done when the stay application was pending before the Tribunal, was totally arbitrary and uncalled for. We also observe that a copy of Order No. 20/92-C, dated 3-2-1992 was given dasti to the learned SDR and another ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
