Gujarat High Court
Messrs Apar Industries Ltd. vs Union Of India on 20 November, 2019
Author: Harsha Devani
Bench: Harsha Devani, Sangeeta K. Vishen
C/SCA/20398/2019 ORDER
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 20398 of 2019
==========================================================
MESSRS APAR INDUSTRIES LTD.
Versus
UNION OF INDIA
==========================================================
Appearance:
AMAL PARESH DAVE(8961) for the Petitioner(s) No. 1,2
MR PARESH M DAVE(260) for the Petitioner(s) No. 1,2
for the Respondent(s) No. 1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9
==========================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MS.JUSTICE HARSHA DEVANI
and
HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE SANGEETA K. VISHEN
Date : 20/11/2019
ORAL ORDER
(PER : HONOURABLE MS.JUSTICE HARSHA DEVANI)
1.Mr.Paresh M. Dave, learned advocate for the petitioner submitted that the decision of this court in the case of Maxim Tubes Company Pvt. Ltd. v. Union of India, 2019 (368) E.L.T. 337 (Guj.), has been challenged before the Supreme Court in various Special Leave Petitions.
2.It was pointed out that vide order dated 23.9.2019 passed in Special Leave Petition (C) No.23356 of 2019 the Supreme Court has stayed the operation and implementation of the said judgment. The attention of the court was invited to the decision of the Calcutta High Court in the case of Pijush Kanti Chowdhury v. State of West Bengal, MANU/WB/0077/2007, wherein the court has Page 1 of 3 Downloaded on : Thu Nov 21 08:49:08 IST 2019 C/SCA/20398/2019 ORDER held that the effect of the order of stay in a pending appeal before the Apex Court does not amount to 'any declaration of law', but is only binding upon the parties to the said proceedings and at the same time, such interim order does not destroy the binding effect of the judgment of the High Court as a precedent because while granting the interim order, the Apex Court had no occasion to lay down any proposition of law inconsistent with the one declared by the High Court which is impugned.
3.Reliance was also placed upon the decision of the Delhi High Court in Principal Commissioner of Central Excise, Delhi-1 v. Space Telelink Ltd. 2017 (355) E.L.T. 189 (Del.), wherein the court placed reliance upon the decision of the Supreme Court in Shree Chamundi Mopeds Ltd. v. Church of South India Trust Association, (1992) 3 SCC 1, and held that an order keeping in abeyance the judgment of lower court or authority does not deface the underlying basis of the judgment itself, i.e., its reasoning. It was submitted that therefore, the principles enunciated in the decision of this court in the case of Maxim Tubes Company Pvt. Ltd.(supra) would not stand defaced.
4.Having regard to the submissions advanced by the learned advocate for the petitioner, Issue Notice, returnable on 4th December 2019. By way of ad-interim relief, further proceedings pursuant Page 2 of 3 Downloaded on : Thu Nov 21 08:49:08 IST 2019 C/SCA/20398/2019 ORDER to the impugned show cause notice dated 04.10.2019 (Annexure-F to the petition) are hereby stayed. The respondents shall not take any coercive recovery against the petitioner for recovery of any amount under the impugned show- cause notice.
5.Direct service, is permitted.
(HARSHA DEVANI, J) (SANGEETA K. VISHEN,J) RAVI P. PATEL Page 3 of 3 Downloaded on : Thu Nov 21 08:49:08 IST 2019