M/s Singh & Sons Industries vs Union Of India And Ors

Mr. Indrajit Sinha, along with Mr. Kumar Vaibhav, learned counsel appears for the petitioner and Mr. P.A.S. Pati, learned counsel appears for the

respondent- Central Excise and Service Tax Department.

Writ petition was preferred for the following reliefs:

(a) ""For quashing the Notice issued by Superintendent, Central Excise & Service Tax, TELCO-III Range Jamshedpur (Respondent No. 3) contained

in his letter being C. No. Misc. Coor./Singh & Sons/Telco- III/09-10/441 dated 04.08.2009 (Annexure-4), interalia, directing the petitioner to pay the

defaulted amount of Rs. 2,28,18,116.66 upto June 2009 alongwith interest within 10 days from the receipt of the letter failing which the action for

recovery of the Government dues will be initiated under the provisions of section 11 of the Central Excise Act, 1944 read with Sec. 142 of the

Customs Act, 1962.

(b) For quashing the show Cause Notice being C. No. V(87)(15)07/APP/ADJ/JSR/09/1214 dated 29.01.2009 (Annexure-2), issued by the

Commissioner of Central Excise & Service Tax, Jamshedpur (Respondent No. 2), for the period from February, 2008 to October, 2008, whereby he,

interalia, has been pleased to direct the petitioner to file show cause as to why;

(i) The demand of Central Excise duty amounting to Rs. 1,62,13,399.73 not paid should not be confirmed and recovered under section 11A of the

Central Excise Act, 1944 and deposit of Rs. 38,09,935.00 should not be appropriated;

(ii) Interest under section 11AB of the Act should not be charged and recovered on duty not deposited during the period from Feb., 08 to Oct., 08 and

delayed payment of duty for the month of Dec., 08.

(iii) Cenvat Credit of Rs. 1,23,45,887.00 utilized for payment of duty during the period from Feb., 08 to Oct., 08 should not be disallowed under Rule 14

of the Credit Rules.

(iv) Penalty should not be imposed and realized under the provisions of Rule 25, 26 and 27 of the Rules read with Section 11AC of the Act.

(v) Penalty should not be imposed and realized under the provisions of Rule 15 of the Rules.

The issuance of aforesaid impugned Notice and aforesaid impugned Show Cause Notice, contained in Annexure-4, and Annexure-2 above, are wholly

without jurisdiction and illegal because the petitioner has already paid/deposited the entire amount of duty alongwith interest for the period from

February, 2008 to October, 2008 and also paid the entire amount of duty within time for the period from November, 2008 till date.

(c) For a direction upon the respondents to immediately allow the petitioner to avail the benefit of Cenvat Credit, which the respondents have illegally

stopped.

(d) For any other appropriate writ(s), order(s), direction(s) as your Lordships may deem fit and proper under the facts and circumstances of this

case.

Learned counsel for the respondents submits on instructions that the show-cause notice has been adjudicated upon vide order dated 19th March,

2010.

Learned counsel for the petitioner states that the petitioner is not in touch since long and therefore, he has no fresh instructions. However, if the

show-cause notice has been adjudicated upon, liberty may be reserved for the petitioner to approach the appellate/revisional authority, if aggrieved.

Having taken note of the aforesaid development that has transpired during pendency of this writ petition, it appears that the adjudicating authority

Commissioner, Central Excise, Jamshedpur has already passed an order on the show-cause notice impugned herein on 19th March, 2010 itself. The

writ petition has therefore become infructuous. It is disposed of as infructuous.

It is open for the petitioner to approach the appropriate forum against the adjudication order, if permissible in law.