TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2012 (11) TMI 603
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....irst respondent Commissioner invoking provisions of Section 11A of the Central Excise Act, 1944 (for short, the Act). 3. By the impugned notice, the petitioners have been asked to show cause as to why excise duty and penalty as mentioned in the said notice should not be jointly and severally demanded and recovered from them by invoking extended period of 5 years. 4. According to the petitioners, prior to issuance of the impugned show cause notice the respondents had issued a notice dated 19.08.2011 (Annexure P8) on the basis of the same allegations which have been levelled in the impugned notice, calling upon the petitioners to show cause as to why the goods seized (branded manufactured tobacco, branded roasted cut supari and unbrande....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....and the excisability of the goods in question. 6. In order to appreciate the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioners, we have gone through the relevant provisions of the Act and the case law cited by him. In the case of Madurai Metal Industries vs. Union of India (supra), we find that the show cause notice was bearing the passage : "Thus it is proved beyond any shadow of doubt that the dealers have been clandestinely indulging in massive purchases and sales suppressions by manoeuvring and manipulating their accounts deliberately and willfully not only to evade payment of Excise duty, but also the tax legitimately due to the Commercial Taxes Department." (emphasis supplied) 7. In the case of ORYX Fisheries Pri....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....re of no merit. It is very clear from the impugned show cause notice dated 6.01.2012 that only a prima facie view has been expressed in regard to the allegations about willfull suppression of the facts of manufacture and clearance of branded manufactured tobacco and roasted cut Supari. In the circumstances the shown cause notice which has been challenged in this petition cannot be labelled to have been issued after prejudging the question involved in the matter. Therefore, the judgments on which reliance has been placed by the learned counsel for the petitioners are of no help to the petitioners as the language employed in those show cause notices is quite different from the impugned show cause notice. 10. So far as the petitioners' reli....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....271(1)(c) of the Incometax Act in which the challenge was made on the ground that the assessment had not been made within the prescribed timelimit. The Calcutta High Court observed that it is not a case of inherent lack of jurisdiction, as the question as to bar of limitation is a mixed question of fact and law. It further observed that the very purpose of the show cause notice was to afford an opportunity of hearing to assessee and only thereafter decision could be taken by respondent authority, interference before that stage would be premature. It held that the assessee was not remediless as in terms of statutes itself there is remedy available in the form of appeal / revision as against any order passed by the assessing officer. 12. T....