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

2017 (10) TMI 655

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... no impediment in the way of granting registration to the Respondent notwithstanding pending proceedings against its predecessor for adjudication of the demand made from the predecessor - the Appellate Tribunal was right in holding against the Appellant - appeal dismissed - decided against appellant. - Central Excise Appeal No. 143 of 2015 - - - Dated:- 6-9-2017 - Abhay S. Oka And Riyaz I. Chagla, JJ. M. Dwivedi, i/b Ms. Shalaka Gujar, for the Appellant Mr. Sunil G. Agarwal, for the Respondent ORDER 1. Heard the learned Counsel appearing for the Appellant. The Appellant Revenue has taken an exception to the judgment and order dated 17 October 2014 passed by the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (for sh .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ion could not have been granted to the Respondent in respect of the same premises. The submission of the learned Counsel appearing for the Appellant is that the predecessor of the Respondent ought to have deregistered itself by making a declaration in the forms specified in Annexure III to the said Rules and by depositing the registration certificate with the concerned authority. The submission is that the impugned order is erroneous and the registration could not have been granted to the Respondent. 4. We have considered the submissions. The Assistant Commissioner, Central Excise while holding that the Respondent was entitled to grant of registration, recorded a finding that the show cause notice issued to the predecessor of the Respond .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... er (Appeals) that the issue will have to be decided. 6. Our attention is invited to a decision of the Division Bench of this Court in Tata Metaliks Limited Vs. Union of India 2009 (234) ELT 596(Bom.). In paragraph 7, the Division Bench has held thus : A perusal of Section 6 makes it absolutely clear that who has to be registered is the prescribed person. Under the rules also, it is the person who has to get registered. The notification in Clause (2) only sets out that if such registered person has more than one premises, then each of such separate premises would require registration certificate for each of such premises. In other words, it is the person who has to obtain separate registration certificate for each of the said premis .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... stration, the alternate would be whether there would be implied power. Neither Section 6 or Rule 9 or for that matter the notification confers such power. The right of revenue, however, would subsist for recovery of dues both against the defaulter or the transferee if the predicates for recovery are met. An incidental aspect of the matter would be if the licence is for a particular period, on expiry of that period, the registration certificate would cease to be operative. In such cases, there would be no question of cancelling the certificate of registration. (underline supplied) 7. There is one more relevant decision of the Division Bench of the High Court of Judicature at Andhra Pradesh in Modi RJR Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Cen .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... quantifying his arrears or taking into consideration his dues or taking any steps for cancellation of his certificate or revocation of his certificate under sub rule (11), the authorities cannot decline to issue a registration certificate as envisaged by Rule 174(9) to the petitioner. As a necessary consequence, the respondents are directed to consider the case of the petitioners for issuance of an appropriate certificate in accordance with law within 15 days from the date of submission of the application. Otherwise, the deeming provision will come into operation. The Counsel for the petitioners makes a request that the petitioners will resubmit the application within one week from today. Permission is accorded. The writ petition is dispos .....

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