This short order notes the existence of a Central Excise dispute regarding duty defaults and the pending appeal before CESTAT without providing any substantive direction or decision on the petition itself.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE V.V.S.RAO AND
THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE RAMESH RANGANATHAN
WRIT PETITION No.17892 of 2011
July , 2011
Between:
... Petitioner
And And another
…Respondents
THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE V.V.S.RAO AND THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE RAMESH RANGANATHAN
WRIT PETITION No.17892 of 2011
ORDER: (Per Hon’ble Sri Justice V.,V.S.Rao)
The petitioner’s company is engaged in the manufacture of LPG cylinders falling under tariff item 7311 0010 of the Schedule 2 to the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985. The second respondent issued a notice dated 13/14.10.2010 calling upon the petitioner to show cause as to why the goods cleared from November 2009 to August 2010 should not be treated as clearances made without payment of duty as per the provisions of Rule 8(3)(a)(ii) of the Central Excise Rules, 2002 (the Rules) and as to why the defaulted duty amount, interest and penalty should not be recovered from the petitioner in terms of Section 11(a)(i) and 11(a)(ii) of the Central Excise Act, 1944 read with other applicable provisions of the Rules. The petitioner submitted reply dated 08.11.2010 to the show cause notice. On considering the same, the second respondent vide Order-In-Original (OIO) No.13/2011-(CE) Commissioner, dated 28.1.2011 held that the goods cleared during November, 2009 to August, 2010 by not paying the duty consignmentwise at the time of clearance in account current as clearances in contravention of Rule 8(3)(a) of the Rules, affirmed the demand amount of Rs.1,36,64,126/- levied interest at the applicable rate on the amount of defaulted duty mentioned herein besides levying penalty of Rs.10,00,000/- on the petitioner and interest of Rs.1,825/- for delayed payment of duties pertaining to relevant period. The second respondent
also imposed penalty of Rs.2,00,000/- on the Managing Director of the petitioner. Being aggrieved by the OIO of the second respondent, the petitioner filed an appeal along with an application for stay before the Central Excise, Customs & Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) dated 20.4.2011. The appeal as well as the application seeking stay are pending before the STAT.
________________ (V.V.S. RAO, J)
______________________________ (RAMESH RANGANATHAN, J)
July 19, 2011 YS
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the writ petition filed by the petitioner in Writ Petition No. 17892 of 2011 should be disposed of on its merits
Whether a pending appeal before the CESTAT affects the disposal of the writ petition
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Petitioner's company
Second respondent
V.V.S. RAO
RAMESH RANGANATHAN
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
