TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
1991 (3) TMI 243
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....d that Indian Metals and Ferro Alloys Ltd. is a 100% export oriented unit at Theruvali District, Koraput for the manufacture of Charge Chrome, Ferro Silicon and Silicon Metal by following the scheme and procedure applicable to 100% export oriented undertakings announced by the Government of India, Ministry of Commerce vide Resolution No. 8 (15)78-EP, dated 31-12-1980. He further stated that the assessee had imported capital goods, raw materials, component parts and procured indigenous excisable goods by availing the exemption of duties of Customs in terms of Notification No. 13/Cus/81-C.E., dated 9-2-1981 and Central Excise duties under Notification No. 123/81-C.E., dated 2-6-1981. Shri K. Narasimhan, learned advocate pleaded that the perio....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....984 and the same was adjudicated by the Collector vide Order dated 10-5-1985 which is the subject matter of appeal before the Tribunal. Shri K. Narasimhan argued that in view of the judgment of the Orissa High Court's order in writ petition No. OJC 1549/84, dated 4-7-1984 no action on the notices withdrawn should be further taken by the revenue authorities. He pleaded that out of the 7 Show Cause Notices revenue authorities re-issued 4 Show Cause Notices and out of 4 Show Cause Notices one fresh Show Cause Notice was issued and adjudicated by the Collector which was the subject matter of the appeal before the Tribunal in appeal No. E/844/85-C and the Tribunal had disposed of the appeal vide order No. 917/87-C, dated 21-9-1987. The Tribunal ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....respondent stated that the order passed by the Tribunal in other cases does not amount as res judicata for the purpose of the assessment in tax proceedings relating to subsequent or other periods. In support of his arguments, Shri M.S. Arora, learned JDR relied on the Order-in-Original and pleaded that there is no infirmity in the order passed by the Collector and the finding of the Collector needs be confirmed. 3. We have heard both the sides and gone through the facts and circumstances of the case. The facts are not disputed. There were 7 Show Cause Notices which were challenged before the Orissa High Court and Orissa High Court vide their Order dated 4-7-1984 has held as under :- "4-7-1984. Learned Standing Counsel, Central Govt. ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ch orders which are passed in flagrant disobedience of the orders of the High Court or Supreme Court. The present case appears to be one where the Collector of Central Excise and Customs issued Show Cause Notice as to the same cause of action against the appellant-importer in spite of the direction of the High Court that no action on notices withdrawn would further be taken. Merely because another notice with respect to the same facts or cause of action was issued to the importer-appellant or that the Revenue in their application to High Court proposed to make such a reservation, would not come to the aid of revenue in absence of an order by the High Court granting leave or liberty to Revenue on that account. That has not been done or grant....