High Court Quashes Orders Rejecting Declarations Under Kar Vivad Samadhan Scheme, Awards Costs

The High Court allowed the writ petitions, quashing the impugned orders dated 9-2-1999, which rejected the petitioners' declarations under the "Kar Vivad Samadhan Scheme, 1988." The court directed the designated authority to dispose of the matter in accordance with the law and awarded costs of Rs. 1500 in each case to the petitioners.

---

---

Issues:
Challenging rejection of declarations under "Kar Vivad Samadhan Scheme, 1988" by the Commissioner, Central Excise, Meerut-2.

Detailed Analysis:
The two petitioners challenged the identical order dated 9-2-1999 passed by the Commissioner, Central Excise, Meerut-2, rejecting their declarations under the "Kar Vivad Samadhan Scheme, 1988." The Scheme's applicability was restricted under Section 95 of the Act in certain cases, including those where no appeal or reference was pending before any appellate authority or court on the date of declaration. Both petitioners had contested dues under the Central Excise Act and had filed appeals before the Customs, Excise and Gold (Control) Appellate Tribunal, New Delhi, which were pending. The issue in these appeals involved a question of law referred to a larger Bench of the Tribunal. The larger Bench's decision was crucial, stating that all pending appeals related to the issues considered would be disposed of accordingly.

The Commissioner rejected the petitioners' declarations, citing that the matters were finally settled by the larger Bench's order dated 17-11-1998, even though the petitioners' appeals were not before the larger Bench, and no final orders were passed on their appeals before they filed declarations. The rejection was based on the belief that the larger Bench's decision settled the matter for the petitioners. However, the petitioners' appeals had not been heard or disposed of after the larger Bench's order. The appeals continued to be pending, and thus, the declarations could not be rejected solely based on the larger Bench's decision. The rejection of the declarations by the Commissioner was deemed illegal and liable to be quashed.

In conclusion, the High Court allowed the writ petitions, quashing the impugned orders dated 9-2-1999. The designated authority was directed to dispose of the matter in accordance with the law. The petitioners were awarded costs of Rs. 1500 in each case.

---