TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2022 (8) TMI 702
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....the input consumed in the manufacture of bodies manufactured on duty paid chassis received from independent owners of the chassis had been taken and the vehicles so manufactured had been cleared for payment of applicable central excise duty. Accordingly two show cause notices dated 04.09.2008 for the period 01.08.2007 to 31.10.2007 amounting to Rs. 1,62,99,205/- and the second dated 12.11.2008 for the period 01.11.2007 to 31.03.2008 amounting to Rs. 2,43,05,657/- were served. Instant writ petition has been filed assailing the afore-noticed two show cause notices dated 04.09.2008 and 12.11.2008 at Annexures P-2 and P-3 respectively. That apart it has been projected on behalf of the petitioner that during the pendency of the proceedings an amnesty scheme was announced i.e. Chapter V of the Finance (No.2) Act, 2019 provided a scheme known as Sabka Vishvas (Legacy Dispute Resolution) Scheme, 2019 (hereinafter to be referred as the 'SV Scheme'). The SV Scheme was brought into force w.e.f. 01.09.2019 by way of notification dated 21.08.2019 (Annexure P-6). For the purpose of settling the show cause notice(s), the notice should be pending adjudication on 30.06.2019. As the impugn....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... to whom the refund has erroneously been made, requiring him to show cause why he should not pay the amount specified in the notice; (b) the person chargeable with duty may, before service of notice under clause (a), pay on the basis of,- (i) his own ascertainment of such duty; or (ii) duty ascertained by the Central Excise Officer, the amount of duty along with interest payable thereon under section 11AA. (2) The person who has paid the duty under clause (b) of subsection (1), shall inform the Central Excise Officer of such payment in writing, who, on receipt of such information, shall not serve any notice under clause (a) of that sub-section in respect of the duty so paid or any penalty leviable under the provisions of this Act or the rules made thereunder. (3) Where the Central Excise Officer is of the opinion that the amount paid under clause (b) of sub-section (1) falls short of the amount actually payable, then, he shall proceed to issue the notice as provided for in clause (a) of that sub-section in respect of such amount which falls short of the amount actually payable in the manner specified under that subsection and the period of one year shall be computed ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....r, deeming as if the notice were issued under clause (a) of sub-section (1). (10) The Central Excise Officer shall, after allowing the concerned person an opportunity of being heard, and after considering the representation, if any, made by such person, determine the amount of duty of excise due from such person not being in excess of the amount specified in the notice. (11) The Central Excise Officer shall determine the amount of duty of excise under sub-section (10)- (a) within six months from the date of notice where it is possible to do so in respect of cases falling under subsection (1); (b) within one year from the date of notice, where it is possible to do so, in respect of cases falling under subsection (4) or subsection (5)." ..." 11. The Division Bench of this Court in CWP No.10530 of 2017 titled as 'M/s GPI Textiles Limited vs. Union of India and others' relying upon the view of the Gujarat High Court in the case of 'Siddhi Vinayak Syntex Private Limited vs Union of India', 2017 (352) E.L.T. 455' has held that :- "14. In the aforesaid case, Gujarat High Court had set aside the order passed after a long delay in pursuance to the sh....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....) are duty bound to abide the same. The expression "where it is possible to do so" does not mean that the time prescribed can be extended perpetually. The time limit cannot be taken to be directory except in a case where the Authority has a reason to offer as an explanation for extending the said time limit. In the present case, no explanation has been offered in the written statement which can be held to be a plausible explanation for not adjudicating upon the Show Cause Notice within the time prescribed. 14. So far as the pendency of appeals before Jammu & Kashmir High Court are concerned admittedly the same were filed in 2018. No explanation has been offered in the written statement as to why the Show Cause Notice(s) issued in 2009/2010 could not be adjudicated prior to 2018. The Division Bench of this Court in CWP No.11990 of 2020 titled as 'M/s Mentha & Allied Products Ltd. through its Authorised Representative Satya Narain vs. Commissioner, Central Goods & Service Tax, Chandigarh' has already dealt with the aforesaid issue holding that :- " With regard to filing of the appeal before the Jammu & Kashmir High Court against order dated 28.08.2018 passed by CESTAT, ....