2013 (9) TMI 908

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....Anmol Rattan Sidhu, Senior Advocate with Mr. Rajbir Attri, Advocate For the Respondent: Mr. Sukhdev Sharma, Advocate JUDGEMENT A.K. SIKRI, C.J.: (Oral) 1. Petitioner firm, namely, M/s Shri Vinayaka Rice Techo is engaged in the business of manufacturing stainless steel, paddy parboiling and drier plant. According to the petitioner, it falls under the Central Excise Tariff Heading 8437 f....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....2 lacs. The said letter dated 1.1.2013 also states that the Assistant Commissioner has given directions that the petitioner would not clear any excisable goods without payment of duty, otherwise penal action will be taken against the petitioner as per the Central Excise Rules and Act. Two employees of the respondent-department are deputed at the premises of the petitioner who are not permitting th....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... the respondents to the petitioner, giving the petitioner full opportunity to respond to the said show cause notice. That stage is yet to come. However, the only question which is to be gone into by this Court at this stage is as to what should be the arrangement made in the interregnum, inasmuch as, the petitioner is not permitted to clear the goods without payment of excise duty. After hearing t....