Chena Enterprises v. The Joint Commissioner
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 05.11.2020
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE ABDUL QUDDHOSE W.P.(MD)Nos.17143 & 17144 of 2014 & 2682 & 2683 of 2015 and M.P.(MD).Nos.2 of 2014 and 1 of 2015 W.P.(MD)No.17143 of 2014 Chena Enterprises, (Represented by its Proprietor S.Anbunathan) ... Petitioner Vs The Joint Commissioner of Central Excise, Madurai, Central Revenue Building, No.4, Lalbahadur Sashri Road, Bibikulam, Madurai-625 002.
... Respondent India to issue a Writ of Certiorari, calling for the records on the file of the respondent herein in Order-in-Original No.53/2013-ST, dated 30.09.2013 and quash the same.
W.P.(MD)No.17144 of 2014 Chena Enterprises, (Represented by its Proprietor S.Anbunathan) ... Petitioner Vs The Joint Commissioner of Central Excise, Madurai, Central Revenue Building, No.4, Lalbahadur Sashri Road, Bibikulam, Madurai-625 002.
... Respondent India to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the records on the file of the respondent herein in C.No.V/ST/15/110/2012-Adjn, dated 08.08.2014, quashing the same, while directing the respondent herein to rectify his adjudication in Order-in-Original No.53/2013-ST, dated 30.09.2013, while deleting the demand of duty on service tax element of Rs.8,80,348/-, interest under Section 75 and the penalties imposed under Section 77(1)(a), 77(1)(b), 77(2) and Section 78 of the Finance Act under the said order.
1/3
W.P.(MD)No.2682 of 2015 Kamatchi Amman Agencies, (Represented by its Proprietor R.Pradeep Raj) ... Petitioner Vs 1.The Joint Commissioner of Central Excise, Madurai, Central Revenue Building, No.4, Lal Bahadur Sashtri Road, Bibikulam, Madurai-625 002.
2.The Additional Commissioner of Central Excise, Madurai, Central Revenue Building, No.4, Lal Bahadur Sahstri Road, Bibikulam, Madurai-625 002. 3.The Superintendent of Central Excise, Office of the Superintendent of Central Excise, Melur Range, Bibikulam, Madurai-625 002.
... Respondents India to issue a Writ of Certiorari, calling for the records on the file of the first respondent herein in Order-in-Original No.MAD-CEX000-JTC-57-2013 dated 31.12.2013, quashing the same. W.P.(MD)No.2683 of 2015 Kamatchi Amman Agencies, (Represented by its Proprietor R.Pradeep Raj) ... Petitioner Vs 1.The Joint Commissioner of Central Excise, Madurai, Central Revenue Building, No.4, Lal Bahadur Sashtri Road, Bibikulam, Madurai-625 002.
2.The Additional Commissioner of Central Excise, Madurai, Central Revenue Building, No.4, Lal Bahadur Sahstri Road, Bibikulam, Madurai-625 002. 3.The Superintendent of Central Excise, Office of the Superintendent of Central Excise, Melur Range, Bibikulam, Madurai-625 002.
... Respondents 2/3
India to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the records on the file of the second respondent herein in C.No.V/ST/15/123/2012-Adjn. Dated 22.12.2014, quashing the same, while directing the second respondent herein to rectify the adjudication in Order-in-Original No.MAD-CEX-000-JTC-57-2013, dated 31.12.2013, while deleting the demand of duty on service tax element of Rs.7,63,850/- under Section 73(2) of the Finance Act, 1994, interest under Section 75 and the penalties imposed under Section 77 (1) (b), 77(2) and Section 78 of the Finance Act under the said Order.
For Petitioners : Mr.Santhosh Kumar for Mr.N.Inbarajan For Respondents : Mr.S.Gurumoorthy (In all Writ Petitions) COMMON ORDER Today, the matters are listed under the caption "For Dismissal". Once again, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners seeks adjournment. The Writ Petitions are of the years 2014 and 2015 respectively. It can now be inferred that the writ petitioners are not interested in prosecuting these writ petitions. 2.Accordingly, the Writ Petitions are dismissed for non prosecution. No costs. Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.
Sd/- Assistant Registrar (P & A) // True Copy // / /2020 Sub Assistant Registrar(CS) tsg Note:In view of the present lock down owing to COVID-19 pandemic, a web copy of the order may be utilized for official purposes, but, ensuring that the copy of the order that is presented is the correct copy, shall be the responsibility of the Advocate/litigant concerned. Common order made in W.P.(MD)Nos.17143, 17144 of 2014 2682 & 2683 of 2015 05.11.2020 VR(CO) KK(18.11.2020) 3 P 1C 3/3