Gujarat High Court
Commissioner Customs And Central ... vs Premraj Dyg And Ptg Mills P Ltd on 27 March, 2014
Bench: Akil Kureshi, Sonia Gokani
O/OJCA/149/2014 ORDER
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 149 of 2014
In STAMP NUMBER NO. 123 of 2014
In TAX APPEAL NO. 406 of 2012
====================================
COMMISSIONER CUSTOMS AND CENTRAL EXCISE SURAT
I....Applicant(s)
Versus
PREMRAJ DYG AND PTG MILLS P LTD....Respondent(s)
====================================
Appearance:
MR RJ OZA, SR ADVOCATE with MR HRIDAY BUCH, ADVOCATE for
the Applicant(s) No. 1
MR PARESH M DAVE, ADVOCATE for the Respondent(s) No. 1
====================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE AKIL KURESHI
and
HONOURABLE MS JUSTICE SONIA GOKANI
Date : 27/03/2014
ORAL ORDER
(PER : HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE AKIL KURESHI)
1. Rule. Shri Paresh M. Dave, learned counsel, waives service on behalf of the respondent.
2. The application seeks condonation of delay in filing the Review Petition. Review Petition seeks recall of our judgment dated 19/12/2012. It is stated that several appeals were decided along common lines. In some of them, where the stakes were higher, the department had preferred appeals before the Page 1 of 5 O/OJCA/149/2014 ORDER Supreme Court. Such appeals were withdrawn with a view to file Review Petition. There upon, Review Petition is filed. Hence, delay. We noticed that the Supreme Court order passed on 08/08/2013. In view of such facts, the department has sought to explain the delay as under:
"2. The applicant respectfully submits delay in filing application for review has occurred in the circumstances set out hereinafter. It is submitted that in the similar issue in the case of M/s. Adarsh Textile Mills and 8 others in Tax Appeal No. 1116 of 2011 & others covered by the same CAV Judgment dated 28.09.2012, the Department has proposed to file SLPs in the Hon'ble Supreme Court on 31.12.2012. The Hon'ble Supreme Court has admitted the said SLPs. In the instant case the SLP could not be proposed due to monetary threshold limit of Rs. 25 lakh for filing Appeal in Supreme Court prescribed by the Central Board of Excise & Customs vide Instruction No. 390/Misc./163/2010JC dated 17.08.2011. It is to further submit that in the case of M/s. Vitrag Silk Mills Pvt. Ltd. against the Oral Order dated 26.12.2012 in Tax Appeal No. 525 of 2012, a proposal to file Special Leave Petition was made and forwarded to the Ministry of Finance, which was received by the Ministry on 12.02.2013. Thereafter, after taking approval from the Ministry of Finance, the case papers were sent to Central Agency Section, Government of India, New Delhi for obtaining opinion of Law Officer regarding Page 2 of 5 O/OJCA/149/2014 ORDER feasibility for filing the Special Leave Petition. The said approval was also granted and the case papers were received back in the Central Agency Section on 09.05.2013. The Special Leave Petition was drafted by the Panel Counsel and draft of the petition with synopsis and list of dates was forwarded to the Government Advocate, Central Agency Section, Government of India, New Delhi on 15.05.2013. The Government Advocate, Central Agency Section, New Delhi sent the case papers to Ministry of Finance for vetting and the same was received in the Ministry on 03.06.2013. After vetting the draft of Special Leave Petition, synopsis and list of dates and events along with the case papers were sent back to the Central Agency Section, New Delhi on 13.06.2013. Thereafter, after completing process including drafting of the application for condonation of delay, Special Leave Petition was filed in the Registry of Hon'ble Supreme Court of India. It is stated that on 26.08.2013 it has been informed by the Additional Government Counsel, Supreme Court of India to the applicant that the Hon'ble Supreme Court by order dated 08.08.2013 in SLP[C] CC No. 13647/2013 in case of Vitrag Silk Mills Pvt. Ltd. permitted to withdraw the SLP with liberty to seek review of the judgment dated 26.12.2012 passed by this Hon'ble Court. Thereafter, the Directorate of Legal Affairs, New Delhi by its letter dated 24.09.2013 forwarded certified copy of above order passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India, Page 3 of 5 O/OJCA/149/2014 ORDER which is received by the applicant on 30.09.2013.
3. The applicant states that after receipt of the certified copy of the above order dated 08.08.2013 passed by this Supreme Court of India, the applicant made a reference to the Director of Legal Affairs on 21.10.2013 and 13.09.2013 to ascertain the circumstances, events and happenings, which compel the Additional Solicitor General to withdraw the SLP seeking review of judgment of this Hon'ble Court. The Director of Legal Affairs, New Delhi gave reply to the said reference, which is received by the applicant on 03.12.2013. In the meanwhile, by letter dated 29.10.2013 the applicant has requested the Chief Commissioner, Central Excise & Customs, Vadodara to give concurrence for filing review application before this Hon'ble Court. The Chief Commissioner vide letter dated 03.12.2013 conveyed the concurrence of the Chief Commissioner for filing review petition.
4. Thereafter, the applicant preferred draft of Misc. Civil Application for review of the order dated 19.12.2012 passed by this Hon'ble Court in Tax Appeal No. 406 of 2012 and forwarded the same with relevant case papers to the office of the Senior Standing Counsel. The learned Senior Standing Counsel has vetted the said application and returned back through mail to the office of the applicant, which is received on 01.01.2014. The Page 4 of 5 O/OJCA/149/2014 ORDER office of the applicant got prepared the final application supported by affidavit of the applicant and relevant case papers and forwarded the same to the office of the learned Senior Standing Counsel. Accordingly, the captioned Misc. Civil Application is filed on 16.01.2014."
3. In view of such explanation, in our opinion, the delay is well explained. The same is, therefore, condoned. Civil Application is disposed of accordingly.
[ Akil Kureshi, J. ] [ Sonia Gokani, J. ] hiren Page 5 of 5