Case Law Details
CNH Industrial (India) Private Limited Vs Union of India (Bombay High Court)
Conclusion: While issuing the Show-Cause notice, it was duty of Adjudicating Authority to take the said Show-Cause notice to its logical conclusion by adjudicating upon the said Show-Cause Notice within a reasonable period of time. Assessee could not be made to suffer on the gross delay on the part of the Respondent.
Held: Respondent No.2-Commissioner issued a show cause notice dated 17th February, 2006 to the CNH Industrial (India) Private Limited for recovery of Rs.6,52,64,433/- on the ground that the credit was alleged to have been wrongly availed on capital goods by the petitioner during the period between June 2001 to December 2001 and for demanding interest and penalty thereon. On 18th June, 2008, the name of the said company i.e. ‘Fiat India Private Limited’ was changed to ‘New Holland Fiat (India) Private Limited’. On 12th August, 2016, the name of the said company i.e. ‘New Holland Fiat (India) Private Limited’ was changed to ‘CNH Industrial (India) Private Limited’. On 19th February, 2019, the Assistant Commissioner, Adjudication Section sent an intimation to assessee for personal hearing. On 3rd June, 2019, assessee requested the respondent no.2 to provide copies of all the documents relevant to the said show cause notice, as available on record from the files of the respondents, since there was no communication from the respondents, since the date of issuance of show cause notice till the date of said intimation dated 19th February, 2019. There was no response to the said letter addressed by assessee. Assessee thus filed this writ. It was held that if the Respondent would have informed assessee about the said show cause notice in the year 2005 itself, having been kept in call book, assessee would have immediately applied for appropriate reliefs by filing the appropriate proceedings. It was not expected from assessee to preserve the evidence/record intact for such a long period to be produced at the time of hearing of the Show-Cause Notice. The Respondent having issued the Show-Cause notice, it was their duty to take the said Show-Cause notice to its logical conclusion by adjudicating upon the said Show-Cause Notice within a reasonable period of time. In view of the gross delay on the part of the Respondent, assessee could not be made to suffer. The principles of law laid down by the Division Bench of this Court in the case of The Bombay Dyeing and Manufacturing Company Limited and judgments referred above apply to the facts of this case.
FULL TEXT OF THE JUDGMENT/ORDER OF BOMBAY HIGH COURT
Rule. Mr. Mohamedali Chunawala, learned counsel for the respondent no.1 and Mr. Bangur, learned counsel for the respondent no.2 waives service. Mr. Jetly, learned Senior Counsel for the respondents in Writ Petition (L) No. 1068 of 2021 waives service. By consent of parties, both the petitions were heard together and are being disposed of by common order.
Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.
Author Bio
