9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2023 (11) TMI 1072 - HC - Central ExciseValidity of SCN - Recovery of Refund claim - Issuance of impugned notices for return of the Cess, since earlier it had been refunded on the basis of then valid law, as laid down by the Supreme Court. HELD THAT - When the matters were taken up for final consideration, it was reported to this Court that, the same issue was pending before the Supreme Court, and as such, all these matters were adjourned on many dates, to await the outcome thereof. The matters before the Supreme Court were then disposed of vide order dated 04.07.2022, whereby the subsequent decision of the Supreme Court overruling M/S. SRD NUTRIENTS PRIVATE LIMITED VERSUS COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE GUWAHATI 2017 (11) TMI 655 - SUPREME COURT in the case of M/S. UNICORN INDUSTRIES VERSUS UNION OF INDIA OTHERS 2019 (12) TMI 286 - SUPREME COURT was held, to not have any bearing on past decisions, which attained finality. These writ petitions are disposed of, and accordingly the show-cause/demand/recovery notices appearing in all these connected writ petitions stand quashed and set aside.
Issues involved:
The judgment involves challenges to show-cause/demand/recovery notices issued by respondent No. 4 for payment/return of Cess and Secondary and Higher Secondary Cess along with interest, which had been refunded to the petitioners. The issue is whether the respondents are entitled to issue the impugned notices for the return of the Cess, which had been refunded on the basis of then valid law as laid down by the Supreme Court. Judgment Details: Issue 1: Challenge to Show-Cause/Demand/Recovery Notices The batch of writ petitions challenged the notices issued by the respondent No. 4 for the return of Cess and Secondary and Higher Secondary Cess along with interest, previously refunded to the petitioners. The demand was made on the ground that the refund was erroneous, based on a direction of the Court following a Supreme Court decision, subsequently overturned in another case. The question raised was whether the respondents were entitled to issue the notices for return of the Cess, which was refunded based on the then valid law as laid down by the Supreme Court. Issue 2: Finality of Previous Decisions The matters were adjourned awaiting the outcome of the issue pending before the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court, in a subsequent decision, held that the overruling of a previous decision did not affect past decisions that had attained finality. The High Court observed that reopening past decisions based on subsequent judgments would lead to endless litigation and go against public policy. The High Court concluded that the decision in the previous case had attained finality and was binding on the parties, and the subsequent decision of the Supreme Court did not affect past decisions that had followed the initial ruling. Conclusion: The High Court dismissed the Special Leave Petitions, as the matter had attained finality. The connected writ petitions were disposed of, quashing the show-cause/demand/recovery notices. The High Court emphasized the importance of finality in litigation and the public policy of providing closure to legal disputes. No costs were awarded in the judgment.
|
