BINANI CEMENT LTD. Vs. UOI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HAVING regard to the subject-matter of this petition, the learned counsel Mr.Ankur Mathur for Mr.V.K. Mathur appearing for the respondent ­ Union of India in this Court has been requested to put in appearance for the respondents.

(2.) AS regards the questioned Circular No.967/01/2013-CX dated 01.01.2013, it is an admitted position that so far this Court is concerned, a final view has been taken in the order dated 01.03.2013 passed at the Jaipur Bench of this Court in a batch of petitions led by DBCWP No.1891/2013 : Manglam Cement Ltd. Vs. The Superintendent, Central Excise Range-III, Kota & Ors. In the said order dated 01.03.2013, this Court has found the impugned Circular, obligating the concerned authorities to initiate recovery proceedings on the expiry of period as mentioned therein, non est in so far it relates to the situation where the appeals with stay applications had been filed but no stay could be granted and the stay applications remained pending for the reasons not attributable to the assessees in any manner. This Court has ultimately observed, held and directed as under: -

(3.) THE position noticed hereinabove directly applies to the present case too. Thus, following the aforesaid orders, this petition stands allowed to the extent and in the manner indicated. No costs.