9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (12) TMI 1107X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ubmit appropriate application before the appropriate authority to remove the name of the petitioner from the DEL which may be considered by the appropriate authority in accordance with law and on merits at the earliest - Petition partly allowed. - SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 17488, 17490 of 2016, SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 17503, 17513 of 2016 - - - Dated:- 22-11-2016 - M. R. Shah And B. N. Karia, JJ. Mr. Kamal Trivedi, LD. D K Trivedi, Advocate for the Petitioner Mr Devang Vyas, Advocate for the Respondent JUDGMENT ( Per : Honourable Mr. Justice M. R. Shah ) 1.0 As common question of law and facts arise in this group of petitions and are with respect to common petitioner, all these petitions are heard, decide ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of present Special Civil Application. 3.0. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that as there was no crystal demand against the petitioner and the respondent had issued the show cause notices for recovery of the alleged excess payment, till any final decision is taken on the show cause notices, the petitioner could not have been treated as person in default. Considering the aforesaid submissions, the Division Bench vide order dated 19.10.2016 issued the notice / notices in the present petitions making it returnable on 17.11.2016. In the meantime, the first authority Deputy Director General of Foreign Trade, Vadodara has passed the common order dated 07.11.2016, on the show cause notices confirming the demand of ₹ 83,49,18 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e aforesaid Scheme. It is submitted that even subsequently in the year 2011-12 even the licenses were issued in favour of the petitioner. It is submitted that therefore, this is not a case for imposing fiscal penalty. It is submitted on non deposit of ₹ 83,49,189/+ applicable interest, the petitioner is put in the denial entity list (DEL) and because of that the petitioner is not in a position to do any business and / or is not position to avail the benefit under any other Scheme / Schemes. He has stated at the bar that if the First Authority is directed to reconsider the matter / show cause notices afresh, in that case, the petitioner shall not and is not disputing their liability to return of ₹ 83,49,189/which shall be deposit ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Spices was deleted / removed from VKGUY Scheme and considering the fact that during the pendnecy of the present petition, in which, initially, petitioner challenged action of the respondent in putting the petitioner in the DEL, the final order has been passed by the First Authority on the show cause notices confirming the demand of ₹ 83,49,189/+ applicable interest and imposing fiscal penalty, we are of the opinion that if on deposit of the entire amount of ₹ 83,49,189/which the petitioner is agreed to deposit unconditionally, it will be in fitness of thing that the impugned common order dated 07.11.2016 is set aside and the petitioner is given an opportunity to make suitable submission before the authority with respect to the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the First Authority within a period of two weeks thereafter and make necessary submissions and thereafter within a period of two weeks thereafter, the First Authority to pass appropriate order in accordance with law and on merits on the aforesaid aspect, for which, this Court has not expressed anything on merits in favour of either parties. In the meantime, it will be open for the petitioner to submit appropriate application before the appropriate authority to remove the name of the petitioner from the DEL which may be considered by the appropriate authority in accordance with law and on merits at the earliest. All these petitions are partly allowed to the aforesaid extent. Rule is made absolute to the aforesaid extent in each of the petit ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
