2020 (8) TMI 737 - HC - Central Excise

Refusal to accept the surrender of the petitioner's Central Excise Registration Certificate - stand taken by the department is that since there is an enforceable demand against the petitioner's company and there is no provision in the Central Excise Act to accept the surrender, the petitioner's request should not be granted - HELD THAT - It is admitted that there are no enforceable dues as against the petitioner herein and as such, the respondents may not be justified in refusing the acceptance of the surrender of the petitioner's Central Excise Registration Certificate on the ground that there were demands pending. Even otherwise, it is brought to the notice of this Court that the appeal before CESTAT was closed on 09.12.2017 and the further appeal before the Hon'ble Supreme Court was also disposed of on 08.07.2019. As such, the demand, which was a subject matter in the CESTAT before the Hon'ble Supreme Court, no longer exists. Even on this ground, the respondents may not be justified in refusing the acceptance of the surrender of the petitioner's Central Excise Registration Certificate. Petition allowed.

Summary

Issues: Refusal to accept surrender of Central Excise Registration Certificate

In this judgment, the main issue revolves around the refusal by the respondents to accept the surrender of the petitioner's Central Excise Registration Certificate. The department's stance was based on the presence of an enforceable demand against the petitioner's company and the absence of a provision in the Central Excise Act to accept the surrender. The petitioner relied on a decision from the Principal Bench of CESTAT, arguing that surrender should be accepted when no enforceable dues are pending.

The court analyzed the decision cited by the petitioner and noted that the department could refuse acceptance of the certificate if there were dues pending from the petitioner. However, the respondents admitted in their affidavit that there were no enforceable dues against the petitioner. The court concluded that the refusal to accept the surrender based on pending demands was unjustified.

Moreover, the court observed that the appeals related to the demand in question had been closed, rendering the demand non-existent. Considering this, the respondents were deemed unjustified in continuing to refuse the surrender of the petitioner's Central Excise Registration Certificate. Consequently, the court directed the respondents to accept the surrender within eight weeks from the date of the order.

Ultimately, the court allowed the Writ Petition, without imposing any costs on either party.