9911796707
TMI Blog2003 (4) TMI 113X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t. Thus, there has been adjudication and there is a demand. It may be that this order is not in the format prescribed. It may also be that principles of natural justice were not followed but those are grounds on which the order could have been challenged. In fact, these grounds were taken in the writ petition. However, those grounds were not pressed. We have, therefore, not looked into these aspects and express no opinion thereon. Whether the appellants are entitled to the benefit of the Kar Vivad Samadhan Scheme? - Held that:- Section 95 of the Scheme makes it clear that in cases where no appeal or reference or writ petition is admitted or pending before the Appellate Court or the High Court or the Supreme Court and where no application fo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... his notice referred to the orders of the Supreme Court and the High Court and stated that on the basis of these orders the Department had re-examined the declarations filed and determined the value as per the orders. It was stated that the demand of Rs. 1,34,51,185.45 (in accordance with the demand notices issued for the period 1979 to 30th June, 1982) was proposed to be confirmed. This notice then called upon the appellants to show cause. A hearing took place on 22nd June, 1995. According to the appellants all that happened at this hearing was that the appellants asked for details of the demand notices which was agreed to be furnished. According to the respondents there was a complete hearing on that date. On 14th July, 1995, the Assista ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n was filed. The appellants then filed Writ Petition No. 728 of 1999 in the High Court. In this Writ Petition they claimed that the letter dated 14th July, 1995 was not an adjudication order. They claimed that it was merely a letter informing giving particulars of demand. They, therefore, prayed that their declaration be accepted. They also prayed that the alleged order dated 14th July, 1995 was passed without following the principles of natural justice and that it should be quashed. This writ petition has been disposed of by the impugned judgment. A reading of the impugned order shows that the only ground urged before the High Court was that the rejection of their declaration was wrong. It is clear that the challenge to the validity of t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Then it calls upon the appellants to pay the balance amount. Thus, there has been adjudication and there is a demand. It may be that this order is not in the format prescribed. It may also be that principles of natural justice were not followed but those are grounds on which the order could have been challenged. In fact, these grounds were taken in the writ petition. However, those grounds were not pressed. We have, therefore, not looked into these aspects and express no opinion thereon. 6.The question then arises is whether the appellants are entitled to the benefit of the Kar Vivad Samadhan Scheme. Section 95 of the Scheme makes it clear that in cases where no appeal or reference or writ petition is admitted or pending before the Appella ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
