9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (7) TMI 31X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... dated 12-9-2013, the petitioner-assessee has been called upon to deposit the service tax amounting to Rs. 1,61,17,199/- together with interest and further, the penalty imposed in the sum of Rs. 1,72,17,199/- under the Order-in-Original No. 47/2012/ST/JPR-II, dated 23-11-2012. Then, by the communication dated 3/7-10-2013, the representation made by the petitioner has been rejected. 2. It is submitted that the appeal bearing No. ST/55918/ 2013-CU(DB) along with Stay Application No. ST/STAY/56256/2013 has been filed by the petitioner-assessee before the CESTAT on 20-2-2013; and the matter was listed on several dates before the CESTAT but got adjourned for one reason or the other though always attended at by or on behalf of the petitioner ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... od as mentioned therein, non est insofar it relates to the situation where the appeals with stay applications had been filed but no stay could be granted and the stay applications remained pending for the reasons not attributable to the assessees in any manner. In the order dated 1-3-2013 passed in Manglam Cement Ltd. (supra), this Court observed, held and directed as under :- "In the wake of the above, we hold that the impugned circular dated 1-1-2013 obligating the concerned authorities to initiate recovery proceedings on the expiry of period as mentioned therein so far as it relates to the situations where appeals with stay applications have been filed, but no stay had been granted and the stay applications had been kept pending fop rea ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... dicated therein. Having regard to the identicalness of the challenge made in the instant writ petition, we deem it expedient to close this matter by giving liberty to the petitioner to lay before the authority concerned a copy of the judgment and order dated 1-3-2013 for the needful. The stay application also stands disposed of." 7. With the legal position having been concluded by this Court more than 8 months back; and in no uncertain terms, this Court having pronounced the Circular in question "non est" insofar relating to the situation where the stay applications remain pending in the appellate fora, it sounds rather strange that the concerned Assistant Commissioner, Central Excise Division, Udaipur has at all chosen to issue the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... and intentions of the respondents. 11. Having regard to the circumstances, we feel impelled that even while admitting this writ petition and staying operation of the impugned order, a notice be issued to the Assistant Commissioner, Central Excise Division, Udaipur and the Additional Commissioner (Recovery), Central Excise Commissionerate, Jaipur-II to show cause as to why the proceedings for having committed contempt of the order of this Court dated 1-3-2013 as passed in DBCWP No. 1891/2013 be not initiated. 12. In view of the above, this writ petition is admitted for hearing. Notices be issued to the respondents. Notices of the stay application be also issued. 13. In the meanwhile and until further orders, operation, effe ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
