Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding


  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

2018 (11) TMI 743

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... BLE MR.JUSTICE ANANT S. DAVE) 1. Heard Mr. P.P. Majmudar, learned advocate for the petitioner and Mr. Dhaval D Vyas, learned advocate for respondent no. 2. 2. At the outset, this petition is disposed of by taking note that Civil Appeals No. 9620 to 9624 of 2016 are pending before the Supreme Court of India whereby order dated 25.10.2013 passed in Special Civil Applications No. 14917 to 14921 of 2013 by the Division Bench of this court is under challenge. 3. On 27.09.2018, this court was constrained to pass the following order: 1. This petition under Articles 226 and 265 of the Constitution of India is filed by the petitioners against the respondents, specifically with a prayer against respondent nos.3 to 6, which reads as un .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ision Bench in a writ petition was not only accepted but refund claim of the petitioner was also sanctioned on 20.2.2014. In addition to above, on 26.6.2014 instructions were issued by Central Board of Excise and Customs, Department of Revenue, Ministry of Finance, Government of India, whereby all Chief Commissioners of Central Excise and Service Tax and all Chief Commissioners of Customs were given instructions with regard to judicial discipline to be followed in adjudication proceedings. In the above instructions, it is referred that for not following the binding precedent, the petitioner was subjected to litigation before the Supreme Court in which a serious view was taken. Lastly, such instructions were to be followed by all adjudicatin .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... e is made that order dated 25.10.2013 passed by the High Court was not acceptable on merit and, hence, SLP was filed challenging the above order in which the Supreme Court of India had issued notice. Further averments were made about the next date of hearing of SLP. In paragraph 4.2 of the affidavit-in-reply, the deponent made categorical statement that the authority has not accepted the order dated 25.10.2013 passed by this Court on merit since SLP was preferred. It is also averred that impugned show cause notice is not contrary to law and made further averments about non-availability of refund to the petitioner on supply of goods to 100% export oriented unit and decision in earlier case of M/s.NBM Industries had no binding nature since th .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... re present in the Court. 11. A careful perusal and consideration of order passed in SLP, reveals that delay was condoned and notice was made returnable on 10.10.2014 and almost 3 years and 11 months have passed thereafter, however, the Apex Court has not passed any further order. Thereafter, another order was passed to list the matter on 24.2.2015 for final disposal. Even Intervention Application Nos.6-10/2015 preferred in Civil Appeal Nos.9620-9624/2016 challenging the present proceedings of this writ petition also came to be dismissed and counsel for the appellant was directed to file affidavit of valuation with required Court fees within four weeks. 12. Having complied with order passed by this Court on 25.10.2013, by allowin .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... a Division Bench of this Court has taken a serious view of the attitude and attempt made by the authority, has been deliberately and willfully disregarded and disobeyed by respondent no.4. Repeatedly, such exercise now under challenge before this Court cannot be termed either mistake or an error, particularly, when counsel appearing on behalf of the department earlier communicated requirement of due compliance of order. 13. Before issuing notice under the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 since we are not satisfied by the pleadings filed in the form of affidavit-in-reply or sur-rejoinder, we direct the author of show cause notice to remain personally present before this Court on 1.10.2018 at 11 O' clock sharp. This order is pronounced .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates