M/S. Larsen & Toubro Ltd vs Union Of India & Ors on 18 January, 2005
24. The judgment of the Bombay High Court in Larsen& Toubro
Limited (supra), can also be of no avail to the petitioner. In the said case,
the Court was persuaded in favour of the petitioner therein as the claim of
the petitioner had been verified and endorsed by the Range
Superintendent, Central Excise and the Development Commissioner of
the SEZ. It was found not to be just a self generated version or a self
certification. In the present case, however, the petitioner has merely put a
rubber stamp on the copy of ARE-1(s) subsequently without such claim
having been endorsed from the concerned Authority. The affidavit and
the certificate from the Chartered Accountant are also self serving
documents. In fact, in the representation submitted to the PRC, the
petitioner revised its claim from 409.571 MTs of corrugated boxes
having a value of Rs.1,79,82,784/- having been supplied, to 414.657 MTs
of a value of Rs.3,25,36,085.70. This itself shows that the claim of the
petitioner could not have been taken on its face value.