2000 (8) TMI 91

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....icon metal from M/s. R.R. Metal during the period 1-10-1999 to 31-3-2000. According to the petitioner he had paid the custom duty as also countervailing duty in lieu of Central Excise duty thereon which amounted to Rs. 4,02,28,287.00. According to the petitioner he had paid the duty payable under Section 29 of the Central Excise Duty Rules, 1944. After availing of Modvat credit of the duty Central Excise paid on the inputs, the petitioner claims to have paid further Central Excise duty amounting to Rs. 10,62,50,611/- on the finished goods during the said period. 2. On 24-4-2000 a notice to show cause was issued by the office of the Superintendent of Central Excise Range No. 9, Faridabad. It was stated in the notice that the petitioner ap....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....a and Another, AIR 1961 Supreme Court 372; M/s. East India Commercial Co. Ltd. Calcutta and Another v. Collector of Customs, Calcutta, 1983 (13) E.L.T. 1342 (S.C.) = AIR 1962 Supreme Court 1893; Union of India v. Aravali Min. & Chem. (India) Ltd., 2000 (115) E.L.T. 279 (S.C.); and Venkateswaran, Collector of Customs, Bombay v. Ramchand Sobhraj Wadhwani and Another, 1983 (13) E.L.T. 1327 (S.C.) to contend that this Court has the jurisdiction to quash the show cause notice at this stage itself. We are unable to see any merit in the contention raised on behalf of the petitioner. In response to show cause notice dated 24-4-2000 the petitioner himself submitted a reply and conceded to the jurisdiction of the officer concerned. In fact in the fir....