| Court: | Bombay High Court |
| Head Notes: | Parle International Limited Vs Union of India The Bombay high court in the above case dealing with an order in original which was passed in the year 2019 in pursuance of a Show cause notice which was issued in the year 2006 and which was responded by the Company at that time itself and all of a sudden after 13 years the proceedings were revived and order passed towards CENVAT credit on inputs and capital goods under CENVAT credit rules. The court noted decision of Bombay High court in the case of Bhagwan S Tolani Vs B C Agarwal (1983) 12 ELT 44 that even when no limitation for passing an order is prescribed in law, limitation would have to be read in to it otherwise if such contentions as to limitation were to be accepted, it would mean that the department can commence adjudication proceedings 10 years, 15 years or 20 years after the original show-cause notice was issued which could not be permitted. Larger public interest requires that revenue should adjudicate the show-cause notice expeditiously and within a reasonable period. What would be the reasonable period would depend upon the facts and circumstances of each case but certainly a period of 13 years cannot be termed as a reasonable period. On these facts the show cause notice and order passed thereupon were quashed and set aside. An important judgement which will be helpful where because of no fault of the assessees the proceedings are delayed and all of a sudden are revived where limitation is not prescribed Ramesh Patodia |
| Law: | GST, Other Laws |
| Section(s): | Delayed Adjudication of Show Cause notice under the Central Excise Act- illegal |
| Counsel(s): | Counsel |
| Dowload Pdf File | Click here to download the file in pdf format |
| Uploaded By | CA Ramesh Patodia |
| Date of upload: | November 28, 2020 |
Leave a Reply