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

2013 (6) TMI 747

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... a writ of certiorari and quash tender notice bearing No. 1/2005-06, dated 15-6-2005 so far it relates to machineries of the writ petitioner. According to the petition averments, the petitioner is a company incorporated under the provisions of the Companies Act, 1956 and engaged in producing and exporting best quality ornamental granite and in this regard it has obtained a status of 100% Export Oriented Unit (E.O.U). Under the relevant policy devised by the first respondent under the Customs Act, 1962 vide Permission dated 5-6-1989, petitioner was entitled to import machinery and other items without payment of customs duty subject to full fillment of export obligation unit the entire quantity of granite manufactured shall be exported for a .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... mission and gave representation on 23-6-2000 and further correspondences were made to see that permission granted is extended and ultimately Annexure-A came to be canceled in 1995. 7. Since the extension was not granted, the petitioner filed writ petition before this Court in W.P. No. 33818/2002 seeking a direction to the respondent to extend the validity of the permission and for other reliefs, which petition came to be allowed on 5-3-2003 and a direction was issued to the respondent to consider the application of the petitioner for renewal of the permission/licence. 8. Based on the show cause notice issued calling upon the petitioner to pay the customs duty, an order of assessment came to be passed. Thereafter the petitioner had fil .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ence period. 11. The writ petition was opposed by the Department on the ground that the writ petition was not maintainable because the order in original demanding customs duty has attained finality on account of dismissal of special leave petition by the Hon ble Supreme Court and when once the said order has attained finality way back in the year 2004, the said matter cannot be reopened on the ground that licence has been later renewed for a further period of 5 years. 12. The learned Single Judge has allowed the writ petition and quashed the notice dated 15-6-2005 and demand notice dated 26-8-2004 by allowing the writ petition. This order is called in question in this appeal. 13. The learned counsel for the appellant submits that t .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... petition without considering the effect of the order of assessment by the customs appellate tribunal, learned single Judge in the writ petition and the order of the Division Bench has been confirmed by the Hon ble Supreme Court? 16. As stated supra, the facts in these appeals are not in dispute to the following extent : The licence/permission was granted to the writ petitioner considering the said unit as a 100% Export Oriented Unit. The permission was valid up to 2003. It is also not in dispute that the first respondent has imported certain machineries to utilize the same for export E.O.U. purpose without payment of customs duty. It is also not in dispute that as per the permission granted by the appellants, there was an obligation .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ondent before the learned Single Judge in W.P. No. 8772/2004, there was no difficulty for the first respondent to bring to the notice of the learned Single Judge about the order passed by the learned Single Judge in directing the authorities to re-consider the order of assessment after considering his application for extension of licence period or at least should have requested the writ court to observe that the order of assessment passed by the department for recovery of customs duty would be subject to the result of consideration of application for extension. Unfortunately, such an exercise has not been undertaken by the first respondent and similar exercise could have been undertaken by the first respondent when the matter was pending be .....

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