9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (4) TMI 1601X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... on the petitioner. 2. The brief facts are as under; The petitioner is a Company registered under the Companies Act and is engaged in manufacture and export of goods. The petitioner's unit is constituted in Kandla Free Trade Zone. The petitioner is registered as an Export Oriented Unit ("EOU", for short). For its manufacturing activities, the petitioner purchased goods from units which are constituted as EOU as well as those which are constituted in Domestic Tariff Area ("DTA" for short). In terms of the Import Export policy, the petitioner is granted certain benefits, being an EOU. Such benefits include refund of Central Salestax ("CST" for short) on goods purchased by the petitioner. The policy also permits the petitioner, subject to appr ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... neous reimbursement being granted and which came to the notice later on. That being the position, it was not possible for the respondents to make recoveries after unduly long period of time which in the present case happens to be more than seven years, that too, without any explanation for such delayed action." 4. In the present case, the facts would suggest that for the quarters of January to March 2006 and October to December 2006, the petitioner had made purchases from a DTA Unit and was granted refund of CST. The petitioner, thereafter, had made export sales as well as domestic sales, as permitted under the policy. The respondent authorities, however, held that the refund of CST was not available in relation to the goods sold by the pe ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 30.10.2013, the first communication, in the form of a request to the petitioner to return the amount, was made. There was no clarity in such communication why the petitioner should refund such amount. The petitioner made a representation opposing any such payment for return of the CST refund. Several years thereafter, in February 2017, the showcause Notice came to be issued, which is the first formal step initiated by the competent authority to put the adjudicatory mechanism into motion. Thus, more than nine years after refund was paid, the authority issued the showcause Notice calling upon the petitioner why the same should not be recovered with penalty. Only on the ground of delay and latches, therefore, we would not permit such an action ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
