SURAT METALLICS LTD Vs. COMMISSIONR OF CENTRAL EXCISE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This petition under Arts. 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India has been filed with the following substantive prayers :

(2.) The petitioner-Company is engaged in the business of manufacturing metalized film, lacquered film, etc., and holds Central Excise Registration No. AAGCS6017GXM001 at the premises situated at Plot No. 815, Road No. 3, Rajkamal Chokdi, G.I.D.C, Sachin, Surat. The subject property, situated at Plot No. 8204, G.I.D.C, Sachin was mortgaged by one Veenutex Dyeing & Printing Mills Pvt. Ltd. for financial assistance of Rs. 225 lakhs given by Panchsheel Mercantile Co-operative Bank Ltd. (respondent No. 2 herein), on 5th June, 1988 towards a term loan of Rs. 225 lakhs. The said loan was secured by the respondent-Bank by equitable mortgage of the leasehold rights of plot, buildings as well as hypothecation of the plant and machinery and the first charge of the respondent-Bank was registered with the Registrar of Companies on 16th July, 1998. The Company rescheduled the said financial facility on 15th February, 2000 for an amount of Rs. 250 lakhs, which was secured by equitable mortgage of leasehold rights of plots and building as well as hypothecation of plant and machinery and the first charge of the respondent-Bank was registered with the Registrar of Companies on 13th April, 2000. Since Veenutex Dyeing & Printing Mills Pvt. Ltd. failed to pay its dues to the respondent-Bank, the Bank took over the possession of the said properties under the Securitization and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (Securitization Act) and advertised for sale of the same. The petitioners purchased the subject property for the purpose of expansion of its manufacturing activities as the said plot was situated very near to the first existing unit of the petitioner-Company.

(3.) The petitioner-Company being engaged in the business of manufacturing certain goods which compulsorily requires obtaining licence and registration from the Excise Department under the Central Excise Act, 1944 (the Act) and the Rules framed thereunder, the petitioner had been registered with the respondent No. 1-Commissioner of Central Excise vide the above-mentioned registration number at Plot No. 815, G.I.D.C., Sachin, Surat. The respondent No. 1 required the petitioner to apply for registration of the newly purchased property/premises. The initial application made by the petitioner for addition of the subject property in the existing registered premises for the purpose of Central Excise came to be rejected by the Assistant Commissioner of Central Excise and Customs. The respondent No. 1, thereafter required the petitioner to make a fresh application for registration of the newly purchased property/premises. Upon the petitioner making such an application, the Assistant Commissioner rejected the same and refused to register the newly purchased property/premises situated at Plot No. 8204, G.I.D.C, Sachin. The communication dated 10th May, 2010 sent by the Assistant Commissioner rejecting the application for registration referred to some outstanding dues of the borrower and attachment made, hence, the petitioners gave an application to the Assistant Commissioner to supply copies of the relevant documents based on which the application was rejected. The Superintendent of Central Excise thereafter supplied various documents to the petitioner comprising of notice of demand to defaulter, copy of panchnama dated 2nd December, 2004, notice of attachment dated 20th December, 2004 sent by the Deputy Commissioner, Central Excise to the Company, order of attachment dated 29th December, 2004 issued by the Assessing Officer as well as other documents. The Superintendent, Central Excise refused to grant registration to the petitioner on the ground of non-payment of dues of central excise by Veenutex Dyeing & Printing Mills Pvt. Ltd., the original borrower Company (hereinafter referred to as the defaulter unit). Being aggrieved by the action of the respondent No. 1 in rejecting the application of the petitioner to register/recognise the newly purchased property/premises for the purpose of Central Excise, the petitioners have preferred the present petition.