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

Home Case Index All Cases Central Excise Central Excise + HC Central Excise - 2019 (6) TMI HC This

  • Login
  • Cases Cited
  • Referred In
  • Summary

Forgot password       New User/ Regiser

⇒ Register to get Live Demo



 

2019 (6) TMI 1068 - HC - Central Excise


Issues Involved:
1. Application for vacating stay in pending Tax Appeal under Section 35(A) of the Central Excise Act, 1944.
2. Consideration of substantial questions of law in the Tax Appeal.
3. Disposal of Civil Application for interim relief.
4. Application to vacate interim relief based on Supreme Court's decision.
5. Misconception in seeking to vacate interim relief.
6. Applicability of Supreme Court's observations in Tax Appeal context.
7. Decision on vacating interim relief application.
8. Fixing Tax Appeal for final hearing.

Analysis:

1. The judgment involves an application by the Revenue in a pending Tax Appeal under Section 35(A) of the Central Excise Act, 1944. The application sought to vacate the stay granted by the court in the main matter, Tax Appeal No.1332 of 2014, or alternatively fix an early date for hearing. The court noted the prayers made by the Revenue and considered the history of the Tax Appeal initiated by the opponent-assessee.

2. The Tax Appeal No. 1332/2014 raised substantial questions of law related to the application of the extended period of limitation, reasonable care under the Cenvat Credit Rules, and the validity of denying cenvat credit to the appellant company. The court acknowledged the questions for consideration and the connected appeals to be heard together.

3. Subsequently, the assessee filed a Civil Application seeking interim relief, which was disposed of by the court. The order clarified the stay against recovery of penalty but required deposit of the remaining duty and interest within a specified time frame. The disposal of the Civil Application set the context for the subsequent developments in the case.

4. The Revenue argued for vacating the interim relief based on a Supreme Court decision, emphasizing the need to remedy delays caused by stays in legal proceedings. The court examined the arguments presented and the observations made by the Supreme Court regarding the duration of stays in civil and criminal cases.

5. The court found the application to vacate the interim relief to be misconceived, highlighting a misinterpretation of the Supreme Court's decision. It referenced a similar case in the Bombay High Court to support its position that the observations on stays did not directly apply to the Tax Appeal context.

6. In light of the above analysis, the court rejected the application to vacate the interim relief, emphasizing the need for the Revenue to expedite the final hearing of the Tax Appeal if concerned about the ongoing relief in favor of the assessee. The decision was based on the specific context of the Tax Appeal and the misapplication of the Supreme Court's observations.

7. The judgment concluded by rejecting the application to vacate the interim relief and instead fixing the Tax Appeal No.1332/2014 for final hearing on a specified date. The court's decision was grounded in the understanding that the concerns raised by the Revenue could be addressed through expediting the hearing process rather than vacating the relief granted.

This comprehensive analysis outlines the key issues addressed in the judgment and provides a detailed breakdown of the court's reasoning and decision-making process in each aspect of the case.

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates