S M Kannappa Automobiles Private ... vs The Union Of India on 11 March, 2013

[Cites 5, Cited by 0]

Karnataka High Court

S M Kannappa Automobiles Private ... vs The Union Of India on 11 March, 2013

Bench: Ram Mohan Reddy

                        1




IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE

      DATED THIS THE 11th DAY OF MARCH 2013

                     BEFORE

      HON' BLE MR. JUSTICE RAM MOHAN REDDY

         WP Nos. 11807-809 OF 2013(T-TAR)

BETWEEN:

S M KANNAPPA AUTOMOBILES PRIVATE LIMITED
7TH MILE STONE, PEENYA INDUSTRIAL AREA
BANGALORE-560058
REP BY MR B MARKANDEYA
DIRECTOR                        ... PETITIONER

(By Sri. K.S.NAVEEN KUMAR & R.DAKSHINA MURTHY,
FOR SRI. K S RAVI SHANKAR, ADVOCATE)

AND

1.THE UNION OF INDIA
REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY
MINISTRY OF FINANCE,
NORTH BLOCK
NEW DELHI-110001

2.THE MINISTRY OF FINANCE
GOVERNMENT OF INDIA
REP BY ITS SECRETARY MF (DR)
NEW DELHI-110011

3.THE CENTRAL BOARD OF EXCISE AND CUSTOMS
NORTH BLOCK, RASHTRAPATI BHAWAN,
DEFENCE HEAD QUARTERS
REPRESENTED BY CHAIRMAN
NEW DELHI-110011
                        2




4.THE COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE
BANGALORE II COMMISSIONERATE
C R BUILDINGS, QUEENS ROAD
BANGALORE-560001

5.THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF
CENTRAL EXCISE, E-1 DIVISION
NO.161/1, 1ST MAIN ROAD
SESHADRIPURAM
BANGALORE-560020

6.THE SUPERINTENDENT OF CENTRAL EXCISE
PEENYA I RANGE
NO.161/1, 1ST MAIN ROAD
SESHADRIPURAM
BANGALORE-560020

7.THE COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL
EXCISE(APPEALS), 16/1, S.P.COMPLEX,
LALBAGH ROAD, BANGALORE-27      ...RESPONDENTS

(By Sri.T.M.VENKATA REDDY, ADVOCATE)

                  -0-0-0-0-0-

     THESE WRIT PETITIONS ARE FILED UNDER
ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF
INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE CIRCULAR DT.1.1.13,
VIDE ANN-C, AS BEING ILLEGAL, ARBITRARY &
ULTRA VIRES, THE PROVISIONS OF THE CENTRAL
EXCISE ACT, 1944 & CUSTOMS ACT 1962, & THE
PROVISIONS OF ARTICLE 14, 265 & 300A OF THE
CONSTITUTION OF INDIA AND CONSEQUENTLY
QUASH THE ATTACHMENT NOTICE FOR RECOVERY
OF ARREARS OF CENTRAL EXCISE DUTY ISSUED BY
THE R5, DT.22.2.13, VIDE ANN-E AS BEING ILLEGAL
& UNTENABLE IN ALW, IN THE FACTS &
CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE INSTANT CASE.
                                   3




     These writ petitions coming on for preliminary
hearing this day, the Court passed the following:-


                                  ORDER

It is the case of the petitioner that an appeal filed against the demand together with an application for stay of the said demand and another application for modification of the said order is pending before the seventh respondent. According to the petitioner, the Assessing Officer without awaiting orders over the said applications has initiated action for recovery and hence, this petition.

2. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the pleadings, the petitioner ought to have moved the seventh respondent to pass an order over the application for stay. Reserving liberty to the petitioner to move such an application, which if done, there is no reason to believe that the seventh respondent will not consider the application for stay and pass orders on the same within a period of two weeks 4 from today, until then there shall be a stay of recovery proceeding.

3. The writ petitions are disposed of, accordingly.

Sd/-

JUDGE *alb/-.

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Karnataka High Court