TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2014 (5) TMI 380
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ndustan Copper Ltd., a Public Sector Undertaking, is manufacturing in its factory at Ghatshila copper and articles of copper and other by-products. In the manufacture of the said goods, the petitioner uses various inputs and capital goods and avails credit of duty on such inputs and capital goods under the MODVAT/CENVAT Scheme. Acting on intelligence information that HCL is engaged in availing irregular credit, on 6.2.2002, the Officers of DGCEI, Regional Unit, Jamshedpur, visited the factory of the petitioner and started investigation as to the credit availed on various capital goods. Thereafter a show cause notice dated 19.3.2003 was issued by the Additional Director,DGCEI, KZU, to recover an amount of Rs.8,23,576/- availed on various capital goods during the period 1998-99 to January, 2002 and further to impose penalty and interest. After hearing the assessee, the Joint Commissioner passed the order on 31.10.2003 confirming the recovery of Rs.8,23,576/- and also imposing penalty of equal amount. Being aggrieved by the said order dated 31.10.2003, the petitioner preferred an appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals), Central Excise, Ranchi, who, by the order dated 18.1.2005, set a....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....Memorandum dated 24.3.2011 stating that the permission of COD is not required and while so, the Tribunal erred in dismissing the appeal on the ground that the permission obtained from COD was not produced, nor shown the evidence that permission was pending before the COD as on 17.2.2011. The contention of the petitioner is that with effect from 17.2.2011, the COD itself having been wiped off on the ground that the very idea of its constitution having failed, the appeal proceeding ought not to have been dismissed for want of COD's clearance or even on the ground that COD had not been approached within one month of filing of appeal. 6. Drawing our attention to the judgment rendered in the case of Oil & Natural Gas Commission v. Collector of Central Excise [2004] 6 SCC 437, learned counsel appearing for the respondents, Mr.Ratnesh Kumar, submitted that as per Oil & Natural Gas Commission case (supra), wherever appeals or petitions are filed without clearance of High Powered Committee so as to save limitation, the appellant or petitioner shall, within one month of such filing, should approach the High Powered Committee for obtaining clearance. It was submitted that the petitione....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....bmitted that the above Orders have outlived their utility and in view of the changed scenario, as indicated hereinafter, the aforestated Orders are required to be recalled. We find merit in the submission made by the Attorney General of India on behalf of the Union of India for the following reasons. 12. By Order dated 11.9.1991, reported in Oil & Natural Gas Commission v. CCE [1992 Supp (2) SCC 432], this Court noted that "public sector undertakings of Central Government and the Union of India should not fight their litigations in Court" (SCC p.432, para 3). Consequently, the Cabinet Secretary, Government of India was "called upon to handle the matter personally". 13. This was followed by the order dated 11.10.1991 in Oil & Natural Gas Commission v. Collector of Central Excise case 1995 Supp (4) SCC 541 where this Court directed the Government of India to "set up a Committee consisting of representatives from the Ministry of Industry, Bureau of Public Enterprises and the Ministry of Law, to monitor disputes between Ministry and Ministry of Government of India, Ministry and public sector undertakings ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....echanism has led to delay in filing of civil appeals causing loss of revenue. For example, in many cases of exemptions, the Industry Department gives exemption, while the same is denied by the Revenue Department. Similarly, with the enactment of regulatory laws in several cases there could be overlapping of jurisdictions between, let us say, SEBI and insurance regulators. Civil appeals lie to this Court. Stakes in such cases are huge. One cannot possibly expect timely clearance by the CoD. In such cases, grant of clearance to one and not to the other may result in generation of more and more litigation. The mechanism has outlived its utility. 18. In the changed scenario indicated above, we are of the view that time has come under the above circumstances to recall the directions of this Court in its various Orders reported as (i) Oil & Natural Gas Commission v. Collector of Central Excise 1995 Supp (4) SCC 541dated 11.10.1991, (ii) Oil & Natural Gas Commission v. Collector of Central Excise [(2004) 6 SCC 437] dated 7.1.1994 and (iii) Oil & Natural Gas Commission v. City & Industrial Development Corpn. Maharashtra Ltd. [(2007) 7 SCC 39] dated 20.7.2007. 19. In the circumstances....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ommittee will deal with these matters most expeditiously and endeavour to resolve the matters. 6. Accordingly, there should be no bar to the lodgment of an appeal or petition either by the Union of India or the Public Sector Undertakings before any court or tribunal so as to save limitation. But, before such filing every endeavor should be made to have the clearance of the High-Powered Committee. 7. ............. 8. Wherever appeals, petitions, etc. are filed without the clearance of the High- Powered Committee so as to save limitation, the appellant or the petitioner, as the case may be, shall within a month from such filing, refer the matter to the High-Powered Committee, with prior notice to the Designated Authority in the Cabinet Secretariat of the Government of India authorised to receive notices in that behalf. Sri. K.T.S. Tulsi, learned Additional Solicitor General stated that in order to coordinate these references of the High-Powered Committee the Government proposes to nominate the Under Secretary (Coordination) in the Cabinet Secretariat as the nodal authority to coordinate these references. The reference shall be deemed to have been made and become effective on....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....is not required in those cases." As per the above circular of Central Board of Excise, the proposal, which has already been sent to the Committee and where no decision taken by the COD, shall be deemed to be covered by the decision rendered in the case of Electronics Corpn. of India Ltd. (supra),. Even as per the decision of the case of Electronic Corpn. of India Ltd. (supra), the petitioner having not obtained clearance from COD and not applied for obtaining clearance from COD as on 17.2.2011, the Tribunal rightly dismissed the petitioner's appeal. 13. In so far as the dismissal of the application for restoration is concerned, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the Tribunal erred in placing reliance on the case of Burn Standard Co. Ltd. (supra), and submitted that the case of Burn Standard Co. Ltd. (supra) was decided on the facts and circumstances of that case and the same is not applicable to the case on hand. 14. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner has submitted that the application of seeking restoration of the appeal filed by the petitioner being MA(ROA)-460/2012(SP-757/09) has been dismissed erroneously relying on order dated 05.10.20....