Subscription   Feedback   New User   Login      
Tax Management India .com
TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Articles Highlights TMI Notes SMS News Newsletters Calendar Imp. Links Database Experts Contact us More....
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

M/s. VV Enterprises Versus Commissioner of Central Excise, Jaipur

2016 (3) TMI 706 - CESTAT NEW DELHI

Rejection of refund claim - recovery of dues pending against predecessor of the premises from the subsequent purchaser of the premises in auction - rejection of claim on the ground that the Revenue has collected dues confirmed under section 11A of the Central Excise Act which were due to M/s. Regency Industries Ltd. and appellant is a subsequent owner of the said premises and has taken over the liability thereof - Held that:- When the appellant took over the possession of the premises in questio .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

73 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 appellant possess their factory premises in July, 2004 through auction made by M/s. RICO. The said business premises initially were allotted to M/s. Reg .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

auction, the appellant before me has purchased the said premises. After taking the possession of said premises on persuasion of the Revenue department, the appellant paid a sum of ₹ 27,95,957/-. Later on the appellant filed a refund claim of said amount. The refund claim was rejected on the ground that the Revenue has collected dues confirmed under section 11A of the Central Excise Act which were due to M/s. Regency Industries Ltd. and appellant is a subsequent owner of the said premises .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

me 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 liabilit .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

Regency Industries Ltd. against the order of adjudication before this Tribunal and this Tribunal has directed them to pay the amount of ₹ 2 lakhs out of ₹ 3 lakhs of penalty imposed on Shri B B Agrawal . But in this report by the Revenue, the departmental officer has not furnished the status of the appeal filed by M/s. Regency Industries Ltd. Moreover, while entertaining the said application of M/s. Regency Industries Ltd. whether this Tribunal has put certain conditions on M/s. Rege .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

lant for dues pertaining to the predecessor which are in challange. Further I find that in 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 cla .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ilities would include excise dues. We find that the High Court has missed the true intent and purport of this clause. The expressions in the Sale Deed as well as in the Agreement for purchase of plant and machinery talks of statutory liabilities arising out of the land or statutory liabilities arising out of the said properties (i.e. the machinery). Thus, it is only that statutory liability which arises out of the land and building or out of plant and machinery which is to be discharged by the p .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 

what is new what is new
  ↓     bird's eye view     ↓  


|| Home || Acts and Rules || Notifications || Circulars || Schedules || Tariff || Forms || Case Laws || Manuals ||

|| About us || Contact us || Disclaimer || Terms of Use || Privacy Policy || TMI Database || Members || Site Map ||

© Taxmanagementindia.com [A unit of MS Knowledge Processing Pvt. Ltd.] All rights reserved.

Go to Mobile Version