LAWS(GJH)-1999-12-112

RAJA INDUSTRIES Vs. UNION OF INDIA

Decided On December 21, 1999
RAJA INDUSTRIES Appellant
V/S
UNION OF INDIA Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Rule, service of which is waived by learned Addl. Standing Counsel Mr. M.R. Shah for the respondents. In this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, challenge is against the order in the form of intimation passed by the Assistant Commissioner on 25-2-1999, whereby, the petitioner Company came to be notified that since the appeal of the petitioner pending before CEGAT was dismissed on 31-12-1998 there was no Section 95(ii)(c) of the Finance Act, 1998. It was, therefore, informed by the respondent that there was no dispute and therefore the declaration filed by the petitioner Company came to be filed. During the course of hearing of the petition before us, today, our attention was invited to the fact that the petitioner has filed a reference application on 27-1-1999 before the CEGAT, Mumbai, copy whereof was sent by speed post on the same day on 27-1-1999 and copy whereof is also produced at Annexure C. It is the case of the petitioner that on 31-1-1999, declaration form under KVSS 1998, came to be filed. Not only that it came to be acknowledged by the Superintendent of Central Excise, HQ Office, Ahmedabad-II. A copy of said declaration along with acknowledgment has also been annexed to this petition. This important aspect appears to have been not, seriously, examined and considered. Since the vital document is not considered and examined, which is likely to have a material bearing on the issue, it would be appropriate to remand the matter to respondent No. 2 for reconsideration of the declaration form in the light of the facts and circumstances brought on record. It would be also open for the petitioner to submit necessary proof about the existence of pendency of the reference on the date of filing of declaration.

(2.) In the result, the petition is partly allowed. The respondent No. 2 is directed to reconsider the declaration form of the petitioner taking into consideration of the facts and circumstances and decide it afresh in accordance with law, as early as possible. Rule is made, partly absolute with no order as to costs.