Case Law Details
Parimal Textiles Vs Union of India (Gujarat High Court)
This order in original the petitioners have challenged in the present petition mainly on the ground that the department did not take any steps for adjudication for nearly 17 years. After that without ensuring that the notices were served, department proceeded exparte against the petitioners and passed the order which is in gross violation of the principles of natural justice.
Case of the department is that similar issue was pending before the Tribunal and, therefore, under the directives from the Government these and cases of similar nature were kept in the call book. In the department’s parlance the term “call book” means that a case is kept under suspension from further hearing under certain circumstances.
We are informed that the department carried the issues before the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court has however entertained the department’s appeal to the limited extent of deciding whether circular issued by CBEC providing that the proceedings be kept in call book is in conformity with the provisions of section 37B of the Central Excise Act. It can thus be seen that the judgment of the High Court rendered in identical facts is not disturbed by the Supreme Court insofar as its main impact on quashing the show cause notice and the order in original is Even without going into the question whether the circular of CBEC was valid or not, the judgment of the Division Bench in case of Siddhi Vinayak would apply in the present cases. In all cases, the department had issued show cause notices sometime in the year 2000. These proceedings were kept in call book without intimating the noticees. Without service of any further notices on the petitioners, the order in original came to be passed by the adjudicating authority.
In the result, in all cases, the show cause notices followed by the order in original are set aside.
Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.
