M/S J.K. Cement Works vs Union Of India
2022 Latest Caselaw 6046 Raj

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 6016/2022

M/s J.k. Cement Works, Kailash Nagar-1, Nimbahera, District - Chittorgarh, Rajasthan - 312617, Through Its Authorized Signatory Akshat Srivastava S/o Sh. N.p. Srivastava Aged 43 Years, Presently Working As Sr. Manager Legal And Indirect Taxes, Residing At E-217, Shrinath Puram, Kota.

----Petitioner Versus

1. Union Of India, Through The Secretary Ministry Of Finance, No. 137, North Block, New Delhi, Delhi.

2. Commissioner, Cgst And Central Excise, Udaipur, Rajasthan.

----Respondents

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Vikas Balia, Senior Advocate, assisted by Mr. Vinay Kothari, Mr. Mehul Kothari and Mr. P.S. Khichi For Respondent(s) : -

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP MEHTA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD KUMAR BHARWANI

Order

25/04/2022

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and perused

the material available on record.

By way of the instant writ petition, the petitioner has

invoked the extraordinary writ jurisdiction of this court for

assailing the show cause notice 27.09.2007 (Annex.1) raising a

demand of Rs.4,59,66,210/- towards recovery of incorrectly

availed CENVAT credit and consequential penalty. The petitioner

has alleged that no action whatsoever was forthcoming after

issuance of the notice dated 27.09.2007. However, as a bolt out

(2 of 2) [CW-6016/2022]

of the blue, further notices dated 28.03.2022 and 06.04.2022

(Annex.2 collectively) were issued by the respondents to the

petitioner reviving the demand raised under the original notice

dated 27.09.2007, which has virtually become otiose by efflux of

time and subsequent legal pronouncements.

Mr. Vikas Balia, learned Senior Advocate, representing

the petitioner, submits that identical notice was issued to M/s.

Aditya Cements, who challenged the same by way of Tax

Reference (Civil) No.18/2003, which was decided in favour of the

assessee by the Hon'ble High Court vide judgment dated

27.03.2008. The Department preferred a SLP against the said

order, which was subsequently withdrawn. His fervent contention

was that unexplained delay of more than 14 years by the

Department in sitting tight over the original show cause notice and

in reviving the same at this highly belated stage without any

justification being shown is depictive of high-handed and arbitrary

action and hence, the same deserves to be quashed.

The matter requires consideration.

Issue notice of the writ petition as well as the stay

petition to the respondents. Rule is made returnable in six weeks.

In the meantime, further proceedings as a consequence

of the impugned notices dated 27.09.2007 (Annex.1) and

28.03.2022 and 06.04.2022 (Annex.2 collectively) shall remain

stayed.

List after six weeks.

(VINOD KUMAR BHARWANI),J (SANDEEP MEHTA),J

105-Pramod/-

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)