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

2021 (2) TMI 1039

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... mplicated issues, apart from giving satisfaction to the assessee that all materials, which are available with them, were placed for consideration before the adjudicating authority. One more fact which is to be noted is that the request made by the appellant was kept pending for several years and only after an order was passed in the earlier writ petition on 05.03.2008, the second respondent Department had passed an order dated 16.04.2008. If an opportunity of personal hearing had been granted to the appellant and the various circulars issued by the CBEC were placed for consideration, then a more informed decision could have been arrived at by the second respondent. Therefore, for such a reason alone, the order passed by the second respon .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... r payment of Cost Recovery Charges for one officer for the supervisory work and other facilities like warehousing and clearance of import/export goods for their unit. 4. Admittedly, there has been default in payment of Cost Recovery Charges and the second respondent issued a Show Cause Notice dated 08.03.2007, which was based upon an audit objection, wherein the appellant was called upon to explain with regard to non-payment of Cost Recovery Charges, non-payment of Merchant Over Time (MOT) Charges, nonpayment of Education Cess on DTA sale of scrap, etc. The appellant had submitted their reply dated 21.02.2008 stating that they are not liable to pay Cost Recovery Charges upto June 2002, as they have not imported/exported any consignments .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... he mean time, the decision to invoke the Bank Guarantees may be kept in abeyance. After the writ petition was disposed of, the appellant submitted a representation dated 20.03.2008, received in the office of the second respondent on the same day (as evidenced by the date seal), wherein the appellant requested for furnishing the names of the officers posted for their unit for various periods and supply the copies of such orders and the other units/warehouses attached to the officers posted to their units and supply the copies of such orders. The appellant specifically requested for grant of an opportunity of personal hearing and decide the case considering their submissions. 6. Admittedly, no opportunity of personal hearing was granted an .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... nch mark for the past two years and no claim for the past period could be entertained. 10. Thus, from the circulars relied on by the Department, it is clear that the Board had decided to grant waiver subject to certain conditions. The question would be whether the appellant fulfills those conditions. On a reading of the order passed by the second respondent dated 16.04.2008, impugned in the writ petition, we find that there is no analysis of the bench mark prosecuted by the various circulars issued by the CBEC. It is admitted by the Department that the appellant had opted for the MOT Scheme by letter dated 08.03.2005 and they were permitted to switch over to MOT Scheme from 01.01.2005. 11. In the affidavit filed in support of the writ .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... e, in our considered view, if an opportunity of personal hearing had been granted to the appellant and the various circulars issued by the CBEC were placed for consideration, then a more informed decision could have been arrived at by the second respondent. Therefore, for such a reason alone, we are inclined to interfere with the order passed by the second respondent and remand the matter back to the second respondent for taking a fresh decision, after affording an opportunity of personal hearing. 14. Though the appellant has sought for copies of certain documents in their representation dated 20.03.2008, they need not be furnished to the appellant, but they may be permitted to peruse the documents availabe with the officers, who were de .....

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