Mars Ship Repairs Pvt Ltd v. Union Of India And ORS

2024:BHC-AS:49575-DB Pradnya

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 16133 OF 2024 Mars Ship Repairs Pvt. Ltd., ] a company incorporated under the ] Companies Act, 2013, and having its ] office at 306, Boat Hard Road, Tank ] Bunder, Darukhana, Mumbai 400 033 ]

...Petitioner

VERSUS

1.

Union of India, ] Secretary, Department of Revenue,] Ministry of Finance, North Block, ] New Delhi 110 001 ] 2.

Pr. Commissioner of CGST and ] Central Excise, Mumbai Central, ] having his office at GST Bhavan, ] 115, M.K. Road, Opp. Churchgate ] Station, Mumbai 400 020 ] 3.

Asst. Commissioner, CGST and ] Central Excise, Division-V, ] Mumbai Central, having his office ] at 7th Floor, Piramal Chambers, ] Jijibhoy Lane, Lalbaug, Parel, ] Mumbai 400 012 ]

...Respondents

__________________________________________________________ APPEARANCESMr Arun Jain, i/b. Mr Kartik Vig, for the Petitioner. Adv Satyaprakash Sharma, a/w Adv Abhishek R. Mishra, for the Respondents.

__________________________________________________________

CORAM : M.S.Sonak & Jitendra Jain, JJ.

DATED : 17 December 2024 PC :- 1.

Heard learned counsel for the parties.

2.

Rule. The Rule is made returnable immediately at the request of and with the consent of the learned counsel for the parties.

3.

This Petition challenges show cause notices issued on 13 October 2006, 23 April 2007, 22 April 2008, 20 October 2008 and 21 October 2009. The basic grievance of the Petitioner is that for more than 18 years from the date of show cause notices, same have not been adjudicated. The Revenue Respondent in the reply have stated that the show cause notices were transferred to the call book and therefore, the same was not adjudicated upon. However, on a query being posed by the Bench, Mr Sharma, learned counsel for the Respondents fairly states that when the show cause notices were transferred to the call book, same was not communicated to the Petitioner.

4.

We have in a series of decisions taken a view that if the show cause notice is transferred to the call book then it was incumbent upon the Revenue to have informed the Petitioner. Having not informed, this ground for justifying the delay in adjudication cannot be accepted.

5.

Following our orders passed in various matters : Coventry Estates Pvt. Ltd. vs. The Joint Commissioner CGST

and Central Excise and another1, Bhagwandas S. Tolani vs. B. C. Aggarwal and others2, Cambata Indus Pvt. Ltd. vs. Additional Dir. of Enforcement, Mumbai3, Shirish Harshavadan Shah vs. Deputy Director, E.D., Mumbai4, Hindustan Lever Limited vs. Union of India5, Premier Ltd. vs. Union of India6, Union of India vs. Premier Ltd.7, Raymond Ltd. vs. Union of India8, Parle International Limited vs. Union of India and others9, Siddhi Vinayak Syntex Pvt. Ltd. vs. Union of India and others10, Reliance Transport & Travel Pvt. Ltd. vs. Union of India11, Sushitex Exports (India) Ltd. and others vs. Union of India and others12, ATA Freight Line (I) Pvt. Ltd. vs. Union of India13, Union of India and others vs. ATA Freight Line (I) Pvt. Ltd.14, Beico Industries Pvt. Ltd. vs. Union of India and others15, Eastern Agencies Aromatics (P) Ltd. vs.

Union of India and others16, Cma-Cgm Agencies (India) Pvt. Ltd. vs. The Union of India17, Oil and Natural Gas Corporation Limited vs. 1 2023(10) Centax 38 (Bom.) 2 1983 (12) E.L.T. 44 (Bom.) 3 2010 (254) ELT 269 (Bom.) 4 2010 (254) E.L.T. 259 (Bom.) 5 2011 (24) S.T.R. 97 (Bom.) 6 2017 (354) E.L.T. 365 (Bom.) 7 2018 (360) E.L.T. A181 (S.C.) 8 2019 (368) E.L.T. 481 (Bom.) 9 2020 (11) TMI 842 (Bom.) 10 2017 (352) E.L.T. 455 (Guj.) 11 2022 (62) G.S.T.L. 33 (Bom.) 12 2022 (380) E.L.T. 244 (Bom.)

Union of India and others18, Bombay Dyeing and Manufacturing Company Limited vs. Deputy Commissioner of CGST and CX19, Sanghvi Reconditioners Pvt. Ltd. vs. Union of India20, Godrej and Boyce Mfg. Co. Ltd vs. Union of India21, EPL Ltd vs. Union of India and others22, Shreenathji Logistics vs. Union of India and others23, Nizam Sugar Factory vs. Collector of Central Excise, A.P.24, Dharampal Lalchand Chug vs. Commissioner of C.Ex., Nashik25, Rachana Garments Pvt. Ltd. vs. Commissioner of Customs26, Lanvin Synthetics Private Limited vs. Union of India27, Harkaran Dass Vedpal vs. Union of India28, ICICI Home Finance Company Ltd. vs. Union of India & Principal Commissioner of CGST & CX Mumbai29, UPL Limited vs. The Union of India and others30, Shahaji Bhanudas Bhad vs. The Union of India and others31, Bhushan Vora vs.

The Union of India and others32, The Great Eastern Shipping Company Ltd. vs. The Union of India33, Paresh H Mehta vs. Union of India34, M/s. Esjaypee Impex Pvt Ltd. and another vs. 18 2023 (3) TMI 834 (Bom) 19 2022 (2) TMI 783 (Bom) 20 2018 (12) GSTL 290 (Bom.) 21 2022 (9) TMI 318 (Bom) 22 2023 (9) TMI 15 (Bom) 23 2022 (11) TMI 709 (Bom) 24 2006 (197) E.L.T. 465 (S.C.) 25 2015 (323) E.L.T. 753 (Bom.) 26 2022 (8) TMI 345 (Bom.) 27 2015 (322) ELT 429 (Bom) 28 2019 (368) E.L.T.

Union of India and others35 and Pradeep Subhashchandra Mehta vs. The Union of India and others36, we quash and set aside the impugned show cause notices on the ground of nonjustification for delay in adjudication in show cause notices for more than 18 years.

6.

Writ Petition is disposed of.

7.

Rule is made absolute in the above terms. No order as to costs.

(Jitendra Jain, J) (M. S. Sonak, J) 35 2024 (11) TMI 622 (Bom) 36 2024 (11) TMI 910 (Bom) Signed by: Pradnya Bhogale Designation: PA To Honourable Judge Date: 18/12/2024 10:33:13