9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (2) TMI 1220X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ummons. No sweeping declaration as prayed for by the petitioner in its prayer can be made. Right of a manufacturer to avail CENVAT Credit is dependent upon hoards of factors and such right is to be adjudicated and determined by the Officers of the Excise Department on the touch stone of the statutory provisions and existing facts. We outrightly decline to pronounce upon the petitioner s entitlement to avail CENVAT Credit on the available facts. Petition dismissed. - D.B. Civil Writ No.4487/2014, 10286/2016, 5490/2018, 5492/2018 And 5512/2018 - - - Dated:- 30-1-2019 - Mr. Justice Sangeet Lodha And Mr. Justice Dinesh Mehta For the Appellant(s) : Mr. S.K. Bagaria, Sr. Advocate assisted by Mr. Ramit Mehta, Mr. Kumar Ajit Singh, Mr. Abhishek Anand and Mr. Tarun Dudia For the Respondent(s) : Mr. R.D. Rastogi, Additional Solicitor General, Mr. Vipul Singhvi, Mr. Chandra Shekhar Sinha and Mr. Akshay Bhardwaj. ORDER BY THE COURT (PER DINESH MEHTA, J) : 1. The above captioned writ petitions have been filed by the petitioner Shree Cement Limited and its Officers, calling in question the enquiry and consequent recovery proceedings initiated by the responde ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n his behalf. Be that as it may be, having considered all facts of the case, we deem it appropriate to direct the petitioner to appear either in person or through his authorized agent conversant with facts of the case before the competent Authority on or before 1st of February, 2016. The Authority competent shall complete the enquiry with the assistance of the person summoned or his authorized agent as early as possible. The authorized agent or the person summoned shall be at liberty to produce whatever material available to supports his version before the competent Authority. Put up on 1st March, 2016. 5. In pursuance of the above order dated 06.01.2016, the Officers of the petitioner Company appeared before the respondent adjudicating authority and put forth their case. The Dy. Commissioner, Anti-Evasion after conducting the enquiry was of the opinion that the company has wrongfully availed CENVAT credit and hence issued a show cause notice dated 20/22.07.2016 to the petitioner Company, proposing to disallow the CENVAT Credit of the duty paid on Capital Goods, procured for its power plant at Beawar Unit. Apart from recovery of CENVAT credit, he also proposed to t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... was irregular. 11. Highlighting that the show cause notice dated 20/22.07.2016, proposing to recover the CENVAT Credit has been issued for the Beawar Plant only, learned Additional Solicitor General contended that since the show cause notice, impugned in all the four writ petitions relate to petitioner s Plant at Beawar, which falls within the territorial jurisdiction of Jaipur Bench of this Court, these writ petitions are not maintainable at the Principal Seat. Learned Additional Solicitor General argued that the territorial jurisdiction should be strictly adhered to and the writ petitions filed by the petitioner Company should not be heard and decided at the Principal Seat. 12. In support of his arguments, Mr. Rastogi cited a few judgments, which we do not propose to dilate upon, as the same reverberates the settled legal position on the question of territorial jurisdiction. 13. Mr. S.K. Bagaria, learned Senior counsel appearing for the petitioner Company on the other hand submitted that the writ petition filed by the petitioner Company being DB Civil Writ Petition No.4487/2014, challenging the summons issued to the petitioner Company still survives notwithstanding the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... , he even went ahead to state that various admissions are made by the respondents in their reply filed in DB Civil Writ Petition No.4487/2014 (such as page No.217 and 229 of paper book), upon which the petitioner Company proposes to rely while arguing the other four writ petitions filed against show cause notice dated 20/22.07.2016. While contending that the first writ petition challenging the summons is indisputably maintainable at the Principal Seat, he urged that it would lead to complexity, if the remaining writ petitions filed against the show-cause notice are not entertained here. Mr. Bagaria took us through various summons, notices and documents to satisfy that they relate to the plant at Raas also. 18. We have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record. 19. Considering the first submission of Mr. Rastogi qua the first writ petition (DB Civil Writ Petition No.4487/2014) that it has become infructuous; while refraining from making any observations about the maintainability of the writ petition against issuance of summons, we are of the considered opinion that since pursuant to the summons issued to the petitioner Company and in co ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
