9911796707
TMI Blog1991 (8) TMI 85X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ending with February 29, 1984. The short-levy alleged is of Rs. 7,77,59,992.27 and the show cause notice claims that the Company suppressed the relevant information. The information alleged to have been suppressed is that the refrigerators were sold without including the maintenance charges recovered for duration of four years under the nomenclature of 'service contract'. 2. The principal contention urged by Shri Hidayatullah, learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners, is that the service contract for maintenance of the refrigerators is entered into for duration of four years and this service rendered can never form part of the assessable value for determination of the levy of excise duty. According to the learned Counsel th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ot be stated that the proceeding under the show cause notice proceed without any evidence whatsoever. It is not for this Court to assess the sufficiency of evidence or whether the evidence available with the Department should be accepted or not. It is open for the petitioners to file any effective reply to the material available to the Department and if necessary to cross-examine the witnesses on whose statements the Department is relying. In these circumstances we decline to exercise our writ jurisdiction and examine whether the show cause notice should be struck down. It is now well-settled that issuance of show cause notice can be quashed only on the ground that it was wholly without jurisdiction or it was issued without any material wha ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... epartment to determine as to which officer should pass order of adjudication. Shri Sethna very fairly stated that none of the officers, who have filed affidavits in the present proceedings would undertake the process of adjudication of the present dispute. It is always open for the petitioners to challenge the order of adjudication before the superior authorities, if the order is adverse to the interest of the petitioners. We are not prepared to accede to the submission that all the officers of the Department are biased against the petitioners. In these circumstances we decline to grant any relief to the petitioners and the petition must fail. 5. Accordingly, rule is discharged with costs. Shri Sethna assures that the petitioners will b ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
