TMI Blog2016 (3) TMI 706X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ant for dues pertaining to the predecessor which are in challange. Further as find that in the case of M/s. Rana Girders Ltd. [2013 (8) TMI 540 - SUPREME COURT] the appellant are not in any legal obligation to pay the dues of predecessors. In these circumstances, the dues paid by the appellant are refundable. - Decided in favour of assessee - Excise Appeal No. 673 of 2008- (SM) - Order No. FO/ 53489 /2015-Ex (SM) - Dated:- 6-11-2015 - SHRI ASHOK JINDAL, MEMBER (JUDICIAL) For the Petitioner : Shri Naveen Mullick, Advocate For the Respondent : Shri M R Sharma, AR ORDER PER ASHOK JINDAL : The appellant is in appeal against the order of rejection of their refund claim. 2. The facts of the case are that the appell ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... that the provisions of section 11 of the Act were not in force during the relevant period for recovery of dues from the subsequent purchaser which came into effect on 10.9.04 whereas the appellant has taken his business premises in July, 2004. In support of this contention, she relied on the decision of Hon ble High Court of Gujarat in the case of Jagdish Enterprise Pvt. Ltd. vs. Union of India [2014(306) ELT 381 (Guj.)] and Rana Girders Ltd. vs. Union of India [2013 (295) ELT 12 (SC)]. 4. On the other hand, learned AR submits that while possessing the premises in auction, the appellant was in contractual obligation to discharge the liability of M/s. Regency Industries Ltd. Therefore, the dues of M/s. Regency Industries Ltd. are recovera ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n the case of M/s. Rana Girders Ltd. (supra), the Hon ble Supreme Court has examined the issue whether the dues pending against predecessor of the premises can be recovered from the subsequent purchaser of the premises in auction or not, wherein the Honble Apex Court has observed as under: 23. We may notice that in the first instance it was mentioned not only in the public notice but there is a specific clause inserted in the Sale Deed/Agreement as well, to the effect that the properties in question are being sold free from all encumbrances. At the same time, there is also a stipulation that all these statutory liabilities arising out of the land shall be borne by purchaser in the sale deed and all these statutory liabilities arisin ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... manufacture. This fine distinction is not taken note at all by the High Court. 24. We thus conclude that the judgment of the High Court is unsustainable in law. Accordingly, the appeal is allowed and the impugned judgment of the High Court [2012 (281) E.L.T. 700 (All.)] is set aside. As a consequence the notice of the Excise Department calling upon the appellant to pay the dues of the erstwhile owner of the unit in question also stands quashed. The appellant shall also be entitled to cost of this appeal. 8. Therefore, relying on the above decision of Hon ble Apex Court, the appellant are not in any legal obligation to pay the dues of predecessors. In these circumstances, the dues paid by the appellant are refundable. Consequently ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
