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

2000 (1) TMI 54

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... odity as such and, therefore, not excisable. Prior to 23-7-1996 soap stock was exempted from payment of duty vide notification dated 1-3-1994. The said notification was rescinded w.e.f. 23-7-1994 and Central Excise authorities were of the view that soap stock was classifiable under Tariff Heading No. 1507.00 and petitioner was liable to pay Central Excise duty at the rate of 25 per cent. The petitioner filed the declaration under Rule 173C and declared the value of soap stock at the rate of Rs. 400 per tonne. The Central Excise authorities, however, served 3 show cause notices upon the petitioner for different periods on the ground that value of the soap stock shown by the petitioner at the rate of Rs. 400 per tonne was much less and the ac .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ated 16-6-1999. Application for reconciliation was moved and this application was rejected. It was specifically stated in para 14 that from financial result for the period ending 31-3-1999 (vide Annexure 9 to the writ petition) it is evident that the income/receipts of the petitioner is about Rs. 433.73 crores and his current assets as per the balance-sheet is about Rs. 41 crores which includes bank balance of Rs. 5.7 crores. 3.In the rejoinder affidavit filed by the petitioner almost the same facts have been reiterated besides stating that the petitioner's company has been declared as a sick industrial company by the B.I.F.R. by order dated 30th September, 1998 and a rehabilitation scheme has been prepared by the officiated agency appoi .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ient liquid fund which has been considered by the Commissioner (Appeals). It is further argued that regulation 22 of B.I.F.R. regulations provides that no proceedings for winding up of industrial company or for execution, distress or the like against any properties of industrial company, etc., shall be proceeded with except with consent of the Board. It is submitted that in the facts and circumstances of the case, no recovery of the money is being made nor any distress or execution against the properties of the petitioner company is being proceeded with. Therefore, the provisions of Regulation 22 are not applicable. 5.The petitioner has filed supplementary affidavit to which copy of the stay-cum-waiver application has been appended as Ann .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... eposit the said amount the company will be ruined. 6.Shri Kesharwani has referred to the case of Assistant Collector, Central Excise, Chandan Nagar v. Dunlop India Ltd. and Others, 1985 (1) Supreme Court Cases 260 and has vehementaly argued that the Hon'ble Supreme Court has deprecated the practice of granting interim orders which have great potential for public mischief. He submits that only in very exceptional cases the powers under Article 226 of the Constitution of India may be exercised by granting stay of recovery of tax. Shri Rajesh Kumar, on the other hand, has cited certain decisions of this Court. The same may be enumerated as Kurt O John Shoe Components v. Union of India and Another, 1999 U.P.T.C., 929, M/s. Ganga Fuels (pvt.) .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... , it cannot be said that if 100 per cent waiver is not allowed the petitioner shall be put to undue hardship. 9.Now coming to the next question raised by learned counsel for the petitioner, it is true that the fact on record shows that the petitioner has been declared a sick unit and no recovery could be made except in accordance with the provisions of Regulation 22 of B.I.F.R. regulations yet it may be seen that here in the instant case no recovery is being pressed against the petitioner. Besides this the scheme under the B.I.F.R. regulations provides for a sanctioned scheme and only those dues which are included in the package in a sanctioned scheme is covered by the bar contained in regulation 22. Similar question had arisen before the .....

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