TMI Blog2022 (5) TMI 636X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ithin time. It is not the case that adjudication of the impugned show cause notices was delayed at the behest of the Petitioner. Petitioner cannot be faulted with for non adjudication of the show cause notice for slumber of 10 to 13 years. No steps were taken by the Respondents to adjudicate the show cause notices. The impugned show cause notices not having adjudicated for almost 13 years, are ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... under impression that the Respondents after issuing show cause notice did not initiate further action. 3. The learned counsel submits that it would not be open for the Respondents to adjudicate the same after long time. The learned counsel, to substantiate his contention relies on the following judgments: 1. Reliance Transport and Travel Pvt. Ltd. vs. The Union of India, the Principal Com ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 2018 (360) LT A181 (SC) 10. ATA Freight Line (I) Pvt. Ltd vs. UOI, Commissioner of CGST Central Excise, Mumbai East, Commissioner of Service Tax-I, Mumbai, Additional Commissioner Service Tax-Mumbai-1 [2022 (3) TMI 1162 Bombay High Court]. 4. The learned counsel for the Respondents submits that the delay in deciding show cause notices was not deliberate or intentional. As per the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... h for non adjudication of the show cause notice for slumber of 10 to 13 years. No steps were taken by the Respondents to adjudicate the show cause notices. The Division Bench of this court in the cases referred to above have set aside the show cause notices sought to be adjudicated after 10 to 13 years. 6. In the aforesaid judgments even the defence of the Respondents that the show cause notice ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
