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

TMI Blog

Home

2010 (6) TMI 443

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... g Steel Mills Annual Capacity Determination Rules, 1997, the Commissioner is expected to determine the annual capacity as expeditiously as possible on completion of the verification of the declaration filed by the party. However, there is no limitation prescribed for the same. - an assessee cannot accuse the adjudicating authority of undue delay in deciding the matter unless he performs his obligation in respect of necessary co-operation to be rendered to the authority in furnishing of the materials necessary to determine the capacity. Failure on the part of the assessee in that regard cannot be basis to interfere in the order passed by the authority finalizing the provisional assessment in that regard even beyond the period of five years. .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... 3 MTs and duty liability was fixed at Rs. 13,538/- per month from September 1997 to March 2000 in terms of the provisions of law comprised under Rule 96ZP(3) of the Central Excise Rules, 1944. It was also held that, in case of non-payment or short payment of duty the same would carry interest @ 18% per annum. 4. The appellants have sought to challenge the impugned order on two grounds. Firstly, that the finalization of the assessment being for the years 1997 to 2000 should have been done within the reasonable time and the reasonable time cannot extend beyond five years. Considering that the order has been passed in the year 2009 in relation to the period from 1997 to 2000, the same is to be held as having been passed beyond the period per .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... d advocate for the appellants submitted that, Rule 3(4) of the Hot Re-rolling Steel Mills Annual Capacity Determination Rules, 1997 clearly required the authority to decide the proceedings expeditiously. She further submitted that, the rules do not relate to a situation where very existence of the factory stands extinguished. In such cases, the Tribunal has held that, absence of provision in that regard cannot result in denial of necessary abatement facility to the manufacturer. Reliance is placed in that regard in the decision of the Tribunal in the matter of M/s. Ambica Steel Rolling Mills (supra). 6. The learned DR, on the other hand, submitted that, the impugned order essentially relates to finalization of the annual capacity and the .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... not accuse the adjudicating authority of undue delay in deciding the matter unless he performs his obligation in respect of necessary co-operation to be rendered to the authority in furnishing of the materials necessary to determine the capacity. Failure on the part of the assessee in that regard cannot be basis to interfere in the order passed by the authority finalizing the provisional assessment in that regard even beyond the period of five years. Whether in a particular case the authority has unreasonably delayed the finalization of the process or not, would depend upon the facts of each case. 8. In the case in hand, the impugned order clearly discloses that, the provisional assessment orders were being passed from time to time since .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ting proceedings for imposition of penalty under Section 96ZO(3), then the proceedings should be initiated within a period of five years and not later than that. Clearly the decision is distinguishable on facts as well as on the point of law. 10. As regards the second ground of challenge, there is no dispute that the authority below was not seized with the issue of abatement claim by the appellants. The impugned order merely relates to finalization of the provisional order relating to determination of the annual capacity and corresponding duty liability. Admittedly, at no point of time, the appellants had placed before the authority that the factory had closed since June, 1999. As rightly submitted by the learned DR, the appellate author .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates