Disposed

Ma Care v. the Union of India and Ors.

Bombay HC3 Oct 2007WP/6593/2007

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Bombay disposed of a writ petition seeking restraint against departmental proceedings initiated via show cause notices. The court directed the Petitioner to file a reply but suspended any further action until pending tribunal appeals regarding the refund order were decided.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner directed to file reply to show cause notices; no further action by department until pending tribunal appeals are decided.

Ma Care Vs the Union of India and Ors. — Bombay HC (2007) — LawSathi Research

¶1

 -: 1 :-

¶2

 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

¶3

 CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶4

 WRIT PETITION NO. 6593 OF 2007

¶5

 Ma Care..... .... ...... Petitioner.
 Versus

¶6

 The Union of India & Ors.... ... Respondents.

¶7

 Mr. A.M.Hidaytulla i/by M/s. India Law Alliance
 for the Petitioner.

¶8

 Mr. A.J.Rana, Sr. Advopcate with Mr.Jethali and
 Ms.Rutuja Ambekar for Unon of India.

¶9

CORAM : SWATANTER KUMAR, C.J. &
DR.D.Y.CHANDRACHUD, J.

¶10

DATED : 3RD OCTOBER, 2007.
P.C.:

¶11

 We have heard the learned Counsel appearing for
 the parties.

¶12

 2. In this petition the petitioner primarily prays

¶13

 for the direction to the respondents by way of
 restraint for continuing the proceeding in furtherance
 to the show cause notices dated 13th June, 2007 and
 during pendency of the writ petition not to take any
 action in furtherance thereto.

¶14

 3. The show cause notice itself had indicated that

¶15

 the Assessee’s claim for refund of amount of

¶16

 Rs.13,16,673/- was ordered by the Commissioner
 (Appeals), Central Excise, vide order dated 24th

¶17

 -: 2 :-

¶18

 February, 2006. That refund was actually made to the
 petitioner. However, before effecting the refund the
 department has also filed appeals against the order of
 the Commissioner and the said appeals are admittedly
 pending before the Tribunal as of today.

¶19

 4. Prima facie, there appears to be some merits in
 the submission of the learned Counsel appearing for
 the petitioner that in the circumstances of the case
 it would be an exercise in futility if the action in
 furtherance to the show cause notices dated 13th June,
 2007 is permitted to be taken and further more it
 would cause serious prejudice to the petitioner.
 Apparently, there is no doubt that the petitioner has
 an order in his favour for refund of the amount.
 Thus, in view of that order, the respondents would
 have no jurisdiction to call for the refund of the
 amount so paid to the petitioner. The department
 having already filed the appeals, the orders have
 still to attain finality between the parties as it is
 subjudice before the Tribunal. In these
 circumstances, we are of the considered view that only
 just and fair order that can be passed in the present
 writ petition is that in reply to the show cause
 notices dated 13th June, 2007 the petitioner should
 file its reply, but however, no action would be taken
 thereafter until and unless the appeals pending before

¶20

 -: 3 :-

¶21

 the Tribunal are decided in accordance with law. The
 stand taken by the respondents in para 9 of the reply
 affidavit is on similar lines.

¶22

 5. With the above observations, the writ petition is
 disposed of. No order as to costs.

¶23

 6. All other contentions raised in the present writ
 petition are kept open.

¶24

 Sd/-

¶25

CHIEFJUSTICE

¶26

 Sd/-

¶27

DR.D.Y.CHANDRACHUD, J.

Ma Care v. the Union of India and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ma Care v. the Union of India and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Anand Y. Pawar and Ors. Vs the State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Dipak Bhausaheb Khilari and 3 Ors. Vs University of Mumbai and 2 Ors.

Rohidas Gaurya Mhatre and 10 Ors. Vs Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai Thru the Commissioner

Rev. S.B.Pathane and Ors. Vs Rev. Daniyal R. Bhandare and Ors.

K.H.Sathale Vs M/S.Philips India Ltd.

Vadgaon Sheti Utpanna Bajar Samiti Vs Govindrao Narayanrao Ghorpade Jahagirdar and Ors.