Show Cause Notice Proceedings Dismissed Due to Excessive Delay; Further Action Prohibited by HC.

The HC concluded that the proceedings related to the impugned show cause notice were excessively delayed, rendering further action impermissible. The respondents were prohibited from continuing any proceedings based on the notice. The court found the delay unjustified, particularly after the Supreme Court's decision in 2017, and did not address the validity of the 'Call Book' procedure due to the lack of communication to the petitioner. The petition was allowed, and all pending applications were disposed of.

---

---

Issues Involved:
1. Whether the respondents can continue the proceedings for adjudication of the impugned show cause notice after a lapse of thirteen years.
2. Whether the delay in proceedings is justified by placing the matter in the 'Call Book'.
3. Validity of the 'Call Book' procedure.

Summary:

Issue 1: Continuation of Proceedings After Thirteen Years
The petitioner filed a petition to restrain the respondents from pursuing proceedings or taking further action regarding the show cause notice dated 27.02.2009 and a subsequent letter dated 02.08.2022. The petitioner argued that the proceedings were barred by limitation due to the respondents' failure to conclude them within a reasonable period. The court noted that Section 73 of the Finance Act, 1994, as in force at the material time, did not stipulate any time period for adjudication but emphasized that jurisdiction must be exercised within a reasonable period. The court concluded that the proceedings were inordinately delayed and it was impermissible for the respondents to continue the same.

Issue 2: Justification of Delay by 'Call Book'
The respondents claimed that the delay was due to the matter being placed in a 'Call Book' as per CBEC Circulars, pending a decision from the Supreme Court in a related case (M/s Sobha Developers Limited). The court observed that while the 'Call Book' procedure is contentious, even if assumed permissible, the inordinate delay after the Supreme Court's decision in 2017 was unjustifiable. The court noted that there were no justified reasons to condone the delay after the reason for placing the matter in abeyance had ceased to exist.

Issue 3: Validity of 'Call Book' Procedure
The court referenced the Gujarat High Court's observations that the 'Call Book' procedure does not relate to uniformity in classification of excisable goods or levy of duties and is not traceable to any statutory provisions. The court acknowledged that the validity of the 'Call Book' procedure is pending consideration before the Supreme Court. However, it found it unnecessary to examine the validity in this case due to the gross delay and lack of communication to the petitioner about the placement in the 'Call Book'.

Conclusion:
The court concluded that the proceedings pursuant to the impugned show cause notice were inordinately delayed and interdicted the respondents from taking any action or continuing any proceedings pursuant to the impugned show cause notice. The petition was allowed, and all pending applications were disposed of.

---