RAYMOND LTD. Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By our order dtd. 3/7/2019, we had put the parties to notice that it is likely that the petition will be disposed of finally at the stage of admission. Today, when the petition is called out, the learned Counsel for the parties state that they are ready to make submissions for the final disposal of this petition. Therefore, this petition is taken up for final disposal at the stage of admission.

(2.) This petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, challenges the action of respondent No.2, the Commissioner CGST and Central Excise Thane in seeking to revive six show cause notices dtd. 4/4/2001, 18/9/2001, 24/1/2002, 24/6/2002, 26/3/2003 and 12/1/2004 under the Central Excise Act, 1944 (the Act) by issuing notices for personal hearing in respect thereof on 26/6/2018 and 11/7/2018.

(3.) The grievance of the petitioner is that by issuing notices for personal hearing long after the impugned show-cause notices i.e. between 14 to 17 years of its issue and after 15 years of the last hearing in 2003 in respect of some of the impugned notices, is bad in law. This revival of abandoned show-cause notices long after the last hearing in 2003, causes prejudice to the petitioner as the relevant documents pertaining to the impugned notices were not available, so as to appropriately meet the charge in the impugned show-cause notices. It is, therefore, submitted as held by this Court that even in the absence of any time limit being provided in the statute, show-cause notices must be disposed of within reasonable time. This Court in Bhagwandas S. Tolani V/s. B.C. Agarwal and Ors., 1983(12) ELT 44 (Bom.), Premier Limited V/s. Union of India 2017 (354) ELT 365 (Bom) and Sanghvi Reconditioners Pvt. Ltd. V/s. Union of India (Writ Petition No.2585/2017 decided on 12/12/2017) held that holding adjudication, after a long delay after the issuing of show-cause notices, is bad in law.