CEGAT penalty challenge dismissed for time-barred claim under Kar Vivad Samadhan Scheme. Registry submission not enough.

The court dismissed the writ petitions challenging the penalty imposed by CEGAT, as the petitioner's claim under the Kar Vivad Samadhan Scheme was deemed time-barred. The court held that the mere presentation of papers to the Registry did not establish pending status, and due to procedural delays, the petition was not pending as of the crucial date. Consequently, the court rejected the petitioner's argument that admission before a specific date qualified for the scheme, leading to the dismissal of the writ petitions.

---

---

Issues: Challenge to penalty imposed by CEGAT, Benefit under Kar Vivad Samadhan Scheme, Interpretation of Section 95(ii)(c) of the Finance Act

In this case, the petitioner challenged the penalty imposed by the Central Excise and Gold (Control) Appellate Tribunal (CEGAT) through a Writ Petition. The petitioner sought the benefit of the Kar Vivad Samadhan Scheme under Section 95(ii)(c) of the Finance Act, 1998. The Commissioner of Customs, Chennai, refused the benefit, stating that the scheme was no longer in force when the writ petition was admitted. The petitioner requested a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to quash the decision and obtain the benefit under the scheme. The petitioner argued that the writ petition being admitted before 31-12-1998 was sufficient for eligibility, while the respondent contended that admission post that date did not qualify. The judge considered both arguments and highlighted that the mere presentation of papers to the Registry did not constitute pending status. Due to procedural delays in presenting the writ petition, the court concluded that it was not pending as of 28-12-1998, thus rejecting the petitioner's claim under the Kar Vivad Samadhan Scheme as time-barred. Consequently, the writ petitions were dismissed for lacking merit.

---