TMI Blog2016 (1) TMI 1008X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e Central Excise law. Petition is allowed and disposed of accordingly - SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 20970 of 2015 - - - Dated:- 7-1-2016 - MR. AKIL KURESHI AND MR. MOHINDER PAL, JJ. FOR THE PETITONER : MR.MANAN V BHATT, ADVOCATE FOR THE RESPONDENT : MR YN RAVANI, ADVOCATE ORAL ORDER (PER : HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE AKIL KURESHI) 1. Leave to amend. 2. Heard learned advocates for the parties for final disposal of the petition. 3. Petitioners have challenged an order dated 26.11.2015 under which the Deputy Commissioner of Central Excise, Bharuch canceled the central excise registration of the petitioner. Operative portion of the order reads as under: The Central Excise Registration bearing No.AADCD7976JEM002, issued online through ACES, is hereby cancelled/revoked/suspended under the provisions of Section 6 of Central Excise Act, 1944 read with Rule 9 of Central Excise Rules, 2002 and Sub Para 3.2 of Para 3 of Chapter 2 of CBEC's Central Excise Manual of Supplementary Instructions 2005 . 4. Petitioner No.1 is a company registered under the Companies Act and is engaged in manufacturing of filters and filtration systems falling under Chapter 8 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . Union of India and others reported in 2014 (1) GLH 541. 9. It is not necessary to refer all these decisions at length. In case Jagdish Enteprise (supra), referring two earlier decisions, the Division Bench held and observed as under: 25. Now, so far as the action of the respondents authority in denying the Registration Certificate to the petitioner No.3 on the ground that Registration Certificate with respect to the very property in question being Plot Nos.548 and 549, GIDC Estate, Vaghodia, Vadodara issued in favour of erstwhile owner - Plot Nos.548 and 549, GIDC Estate, Vaghodia, Vadodara, is still not cancelled and/or deregistered and there are Central Excise dues of the erstwhile owner - M/s.Jem Ispat Ltd. and therefore, Registration Certificate cannot be granted in favour of the petitioner No.3 - subsequent purchaser for the very property, is concerned as such the said issue is squarely covered by the decision of the Bombay High Court in the case of TATA Metalinks Ltd. (supra) and unreported decision of this court in the case of Surat Metallics Ltd. (supra) and in the matter of M/s. Jahaan Steel Ltd. (supra) and decision in the case of Prelude Laminates Pvt. Ltd. in Sp ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... mitations as may be specified in such notification, specify person or class of persons who may not require such registration. (3) The registration under Sub-rule (1) shall be subject to such conditions, safeguards and procedure as maybe specified by notification by the Board. Sub-rule (3) of Rule (9) contemplates that the registration shall be subject to the conditions as specified by Notification by the Board. The Board has issued notification under Rule 9. The perusal of the said notification, requires compliance of the following: (a) An application by every person specified under Subrule (1) of Rule (9) for registration. (b) If the person has more than one premises requiring registration, separate registration certificate shall be obtained for each of such premises. (c) Where a registered person transfers his business to another person, the transferee shall get himself registered afresh. (Emphasis supplied) (d) Every registered person, who ceases to carry on the operation for which he is registered, shall de-register himself by making a declaration in the form specified in Annexure III and depositing his registration certificate with the Superintendent of Ce ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... egistration certificate for each premises and as such the registration is always in respect of particular premises and not with respect to a particular person. Relying on the notification issued by the Board, the court held that the intention appears to be to prevent successive registration in respect of the same premises. If that be so, one and the same premises cannot be registered in the name of two different persons. The court proceeded to hold that the person holding earlier registration certificate must surrender registration certificates in respect of that premises, then only a new person can get registration in respect of that premises. From the facts, it will be clear that earlier though M/s. Swastik were in arrears fresh registration was granted in favour of M/s. Jagruti Textile Processors. The court found on the facts therein that there was a systematic attempt to evade tax dues and it is in these circumstances that the court was pleased to take the view which it has is taken. The person who owned the premises was the same but was inducting various licencees who had defaulted in payment of their dues. The judgment will have to be restricted to the facts of that case. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rlier registration certificate must surrender registration certificate in respect of that premises, then only can a new person get registered in respect of that premises. However, on behalf of the petitioners, reliance had been placed upon a decision of the Bombay High Court in the case of Tata Metalliks Ltd. vs. Union of India and others, 2009 (234) E.L.T. 596 (Bom.) wherein the Court after considering the provisions of section 6 of the Act , Rule 9 of the Central Excise Rules, and the notification issued thereunder, has interalia held thus: A perusal of Section 6 makes it absolutely clear that who has to be registered is the prescribed person. Under the rules also, it is the person who has to get registered. The notification in Clause (2) only sets out that if such registered person has more than one premises, then each of such separate premises would require registration certificate for each of such premises. In other words, it is the person who has to obtain separate registration certificate for each of the said premises. It is open to a person who has ceased to carry on the business to apply for deregistration. Would that mean in the absence of the person who has closed or ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
