9911796707
TMI Blog2021 (8) TMI 1169X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ried to justify the delay in passing the adjudicating order but there was not a whisper about it in the Adjudicating Order or in the impugned order. The Adjudicating Authority only mentioned that the personal hearing was held on 14.3.2017, without mentioning anywhere that due to the pendency of department s appeal before the Hon ble Court the hearing of the show cause notice was delayed. It is settled legal position that inordinate delay in adjudication results into denial of principles of natural justice. In the case in hand, the assessee cannot be blamed for delay as they had never delayed the proceedings. Adjudication proceedings have to be culminated within reasonable time and if not, it would be vitiated. The act on the part of Reve ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... .2003 only to the extent of setting aside the penalty part under Section 11AC of the Central Excise Act, 1944. So far as the duty demanded in show cause notice dated 31.8.2001 alongwith interest is concerned, the order of Adjudicating Authority was maintained and it was upheld. Revenue filed appeal against the said order before the Hon ble High Court of Judicature at Bombay but the same was dismissed on monetary grounds. 3. During the pendency of Appeal before this Tribunal, the department had issued show cause notice u/s. 11A of the Central Excise Act, 1944 dated 18.8.2004 demanding the refund of ₹ 36,893/- granted to the Appellant erroneously on the basis of Order-in-Appeal dated 25.6.2003. The said show cause cum demand notice w ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... would have been against the principle of natural justice. He also submits that the plea of the appellant that refund order was not reviewed, cannot be accepted as the demand was under dispute and the same was got settled only after the order of the Hon ble High Court in the year 2016 and therefore the demand of erroneous refund was correctly issued under Section 11A ibid. 5. Firstly I am taking up the issue of delay in adjudicating the show cause notice. Since this is legal issue therefore it is permitted to be taken at any stage. Insofar as the show cause notice in the instant case is concerned, the same has been issued under Section 11A of the Act on 18.8.2004 but it was adjudicated vide Order-in- Original dated 28.3.2017. According to ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ate the entire proceedings. 6. The Hon ble High Court of Judicature at Bombay in the matter of Sanghvi Reconditioners Pvt. Ltd. vs. Union of India; reported in 2018 (12) G.S.T.L. 290 (Bom.) on the issue of delay in adjudication of show cause notice, held as under:- xxx xxx xxx 15 . With the assistance of Mr. Raichandani and Mr. Jetly, we have perused the petition and the annexures thereto. We have also perused the consistent view taken by this Court, based on which the judgment in the case of Lanvin Synthetics Private Ltd. (supra) was rendered. The obligation on the respondents to adjudicate the show cause notices with expediency has been repeatedly emphasized. The decisions in the cas ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
