Research › Browse › Judgment

Supreme Court of India · body

2009 DIGILAW 751 (SC)

Jai Jagdamba Malleable (P) Ltd. v. Union Of India

2009-04-09

AFTAB ALAM, S.H.KAPADIA

body2009
Judgment : Leave granted. In this case at the time of the assessees application coming up for admission before the Settlement Commission, the following order was passed: "On examining the submissions made by both sides, we find that the applicant satisfies the conditions contained in Section 32E of Central Excise Act, 1944. Keeping in view the plea taken by the applicant that the Companys other income was taken as sale proceeds of clandestine clearances and the claims for deduction lodged before the Commissioner Central Excise Kanpur vide letter dated 23.02.06 and the comments furnished by DGCEI, Kanpur vide letter dated 1.03.06, we find that the claims and counter claims needs to be verified with reference to facts and evidence on record leading to the issue of Show Cause Notice. It does not appear to be appropriate to brand the applicant as a company not making full and true disclosure attributing noncooperation at this stage, subject to the outcome of the investigation to be ordered by the Commission, the application is admitted under Section 32F(1) of Central Excise Act, 1944. The admitted amount of Rs.12,13,611/-, may be appropriated from the advance payment of Rs.15,00,000/- made by the applicant company." As can be seen from the above quoted para, counter claim filed by the assessee was to be verified with reference to the facts and evidence on record leading to the issuance of Show Cause Notice. Without undertaking that exercise the Settlement Commission passed a final order confirming the demand of the Department in the Show Cause Notice for a sum of Rs.57,10,562/-. In the circumstances, we set aside the impugned judgment of the High Court as well as the order of the Settlement Commission and we are directing the Settlement Commission to undertake the above exercise and dispose of the matter in accordance with law. The Commission may also consider remanding the matter to the Adjudicating Authority, if so advised, in terms of Section 32L of the Central Excise Act, 1944. In case the Settlement Commission itself decides to adjudicate upon the demand, then due opportunity should be given to the assessee to put-forth his case. The appeal is disposed of accordingly with no order as to costs.