TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
When case Id is present, search is done only for this
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>High Court directs Revenue to withhold coercive recovery pending Tribunal decision</h1> <h3>M/s KRISHNA SAA FABS PVT LTD. Versus UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS</h3> The High Court of Andhra Pradesh directed Revenue not to initiate coercive measures for recovery of Central Excise or Service Tax liabilities, interest, ... Recovery proceedings - Circular dated 1-1-2013 - Held that:- Directing the respondents not to initiate any coercive measures for recovery of the Central Excise or Service Tax liability or interest and penalties as assessed in the Orders-in-Original or as confirmed in the appeals pending disposal of the applications filed by the petitioners for waiver of pre-deposit and wherever filed, the applications for stay of the Central Excise or Service Tax, interest and penalties, as the case may be. Issues: Ineffectual functioning of the Tribunal in dealing with applications for waiver of pre-deposit and stay of tax, challenge to a Circular issued by the Central Board of Excise and Customs, directive on recovery proceedings, judicial review of Orders-in-Original and Orders in appeal.In the judgment delivered by the High Court of Andhra Pradesh, the core grievances presented in several writ petitions revolved around the ineffectual functioning of the Tribunal in addressing applications for waiver of pre-deposit and stay of tax. The petitioners had received Orders-in-Original under the Central Excise Act, 1944, or for levy and collection of Service Tax under the Finance Act, 1994, which they appealed against. However, further appeals to the Tribunal were hindered due to a vacancy in the office of the Technical Member, rendering the Tribunal unable to consider the petitioners' applications. Some petitions also challenged a Circular issued by the Central Board of Excise and Customs, directing Revenue to initiate recovery proceedings if no stay was granted within 30 days of filing an appeal.The learned counsel for the petitioners did not pursue the challenge to the Circular but sought relief from the Court to direct Revenue not to take coercive measures until the Tribunal disposed of their applications for waiver and stay. After hearing arguments from both sides and acknowledging the Tribunal's current ineffectual state, the Court directed the respondents not to initiate coercive measures for recovery of Central Excise or Service Tax liabilities, interest, and penalties assessed in the Orders-in-Original or confirmed in appeals. The liability of the petitioners to pay the assessed amounts would be subject to the Tribunal's orders on their applications for waiver and stay.Ultimately, the Court disposed of the writ petitions without costs, providing interim relief to the petitioners by ensuring that no coercive recovery measures would be taken by Revenue until the Tribunal addressed their pending applications for waiver and stay. This judgment aimed to mitigate the impact of the Tribunal's non-functionality on the petitioners' rights to seek relief in tax matters, preserving their opportunity for judicial review and fair consideration of their applications.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
