9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (8) TMI 1287X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the exercise of due diligence, was not within his knowledge or could not be produced by him at the time when the order was passed or on account of some error apparent on the fact of the record. In the present case, it is not even the case of the Petitioners that they have discovered any new or important matter or evidence which was not within their knowledge or which could not be produced by them when the said Order dated 5th February 2024 was passed. Therefore, this Review Petition is not maintainable on this ground. Further, when the Order dated 5th February 2024 was passed, the ground of limitation was not even taken in the Writ Petitions, and, therefore, the Petitioners cannot contend that there is any error apparent on the face of the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... o urge the issue regarding the time barred demand/limitation, by way of a review petition before the High Court. His submission is placed on record. In the circumstances, the Special Leave Petition is dismissed as withdrawn with the aforesaid liberty. 3. It is important to note that although liberty was sought before the Supreme Court to urge the issue regarding the time barred demand/limitation by way of a Review Petition before this Court, the said ground of limitation was not taken in the original Writ Petitions. In fact, the Petitioners now, during the course of hearing of this Review Petition, have sought amendments in the Writ Petitions to bring the said grounds on record. 4. Mr. Darius Shroff, the learned Senior Advocate appearing on ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... JS International Vs. Union of India 2022 (380) E.L.T, 577 (Guj.). 6. Mr. Shroff submitted that, in the present case, the Show Cause Notice dated 14th December 2022, being issued beyond a period of 6 to 12 years from the relevant dates, is time barred and thus renders the entire proceedings by Respondent No. 2 wholly without jurisdiction. 7. Mr. Shroff submitted that the issue of limitation is a jurisdictional issue and can be raised at any stage. Therefore it should be permitted to be raised at the stage of review. In support of this submission, he relied upon the judgment of the Supreme Court in Fatma Bibi Ahmed Patel Vs. State of Gujarat Ors. (2008) 6 SCC 789. 8. Further, Mr. Shroff submitted that, since large amounts had been demanded to ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e which was not within their knowledge or which could not be produced by them when the said Order dated 5th February 2024 was passed. Therefore, this Review Petition is not maintainable on this ground. 14. Further, when the Order dated 5th February 2024 was passed, the ground of limitation was not even taken in the Writ Petitions, and, therefore, the Petitioners cannot contend that there is any error apparent on the face of the record on that account. For this reason also, the present Review Petition is not maintainable. 15. Further, merely because the Petitioners have to deposit monies while filing an Appeal, does not mean that the said Writ Petitions should be entertained by this Court. 16. Further, all the issues raised in the Writ Petit ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
