TMI Blog2015 (5) TMI 660X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... uld not be proper to abandon the proceedings much less without putting the applicant on notice about consideration of section 32-O. - Matter remanded back - Decided in favour of assessee. - WRIT PETITION NO. 2692 OF 2014 - - - Dated:- 28-1-2015 - S.C. DHARMADHIKARI AND SUNIL P. DESHMUKH, JJ. For The Petitioner : Prakash Shah and Durgaprasad Poojari For The Respondent : Vijay Kantharia and Jitendra B. Mishra JUDGMENT Sunil P. Deshmukh, J. - Rule. 2. Rule made returnable forthwith by consent of the parties and heard finally. 3. By this Petition invoking powers of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the Petitioners question the propriety and legality of the order dated 28th July, 2014, wher ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s passed by the Settlement Commission in said proceeding, the Commission considered that under an earlier settlement application in respect of a show cause notice dated 28th December, 2012 issued to the Petitioners under the order dated 31st October, 2013, the Petitioners were penalised and as such bar under section 32-O(1) would be attracted. Further, it went on to observe that the applicants had committed fraud on the department by showing payment of duty, in their return, while no payment has been actually made and it would not have been found out but for the investigation by DGCEI. 6. Mr. Shah-learned Counsel appearing for the Petitioners vehemently submits that the impugned order in present Petition dated 28th July, 2014 is in gross ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tice dated 19th December, 2012 alleging incorrect and irregular taking up cenvat credit during 31st March, 2009 to 1st April, 2010. In the present case, the procedure as contemplated under section 32E and 32F of the Central Excise Act, 1944 has been scrupulously followed and on being satisfied that the Petitioners have fulfilled all the norms prescribed for settlement, the application was decided to be proceeded with. In such a case, according to him, the decision to proceed with cannot be altered and reviewed. He further submits that as a matter of fact, the Petitioners were absolutely unaware about 'a bar' is being considered after the Settlement Commission had decided to proceed with the matter. He submits that the consideration ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... , 2013. In such a case, it would not be proper to abandon the proceedings much less without putting the applicant on notice about consideration of section 32-O. We, in this peculiar set of facts, deem it appropriate that the decision with respect to proceeding with the matter being already taken, it does not deserve to be looked back to and reviewed and the Commission would rather proceed with the same. 10. We therefore set aside the order passed by the Settlement Commission and remand the matter for reconsideration by the Commission, giving opportunity to the parties concerned and after hearing them and to decide the application. The Commission to proceed with the application in accordance with its decision dated 20th December, 2013. Ru ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
