TMI Blog2019 (7) TMI 683X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ORAL ORDER ( PER : HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE J.B.PARDIWALA) 1. By this writ application under Article226 of the Constitution of India, the writapplicant seeks to challenge the legality and validity of the showcause notice dated 18/03/2019 issued by the Principal Commissioner, Central GST and Central Excise, VadodaraI. 2. By issue of the said show cause notice, the writ applicant has been called upon to show cause as to why ( i) The Central Excise Duty amounting to ₹ 2,70,17,147/( AnnexureA) and Cenvat credit of ₹ 13,65,766/( AnnexureB) should not be demanded under Section11A of the Central Excise Act, 1944. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . Court at Mandaleshwar for kind information. On receipt of the orders of remission of duty, we propose to destroy the goods in the presence of the Central Excise Officers. The Cenvat Credit aforementioned that we have availed and involved in the finished goods on which remission of duty is sought for, total ₹ 13,65,766/has been reversed under entry No.182 dt.21.01.2006 from out Cenvat Credit account. It is therefore humbly requested that order for remission of duty and further destruction of the said goods may kindly be granted. 4. It is further pointed out that the aforesaid remission application filed by the writapplicant, came to be rejected by the Commissioner ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... shwar Court, on the issue of brand name. In this position, it was beyond the control of the appellant to market the said goods. The Adjudicating Authority rejected the application on various counts which are absolutely irrelevant. As regards the reference made to a case of infringement of Intellectual Property Right, the Commissioner has no jurisdiction at all for drawing inference and holding that the appellant had malafide intention. The ld. Commissioner on his own viewed that the goods packed in Manikchand brand should have been repacked in RMD brand and sold. This is also beyond the jurisdiction of the ld. Commissioner for the reason that whether the goods can be repacked and sold it is completely on the assessee to decide after ana ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... f Central Excise Rules, 2002. 5. As per out above observations, we setaside the impugned order and remand the matter to the Adjudicating Authority for reconsideration of appellant's remission application and dispose of the same in accordance with law. 7. Mr. Joshi submitted that the order passed by the tribunal is very clear. The Adjudicating Authority was directed to reconsider the remission application filed by the writapplicant. Instead of reconsidering the remission application filed by the writapplicant, straightway the impugned showcause notice has been issued. 8. Let Notice be issued to the respondents, returnable on 31/07/2019 . In the meantime, let there be an adinterim order ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
