The Court initiates contempt proceedings against Superintendent, for issuing demand notice to assessee based on Circular No 967/01/2013-CX dated 01/01/2013 operation of which was stayed by the Court

Fashion Suiting’s (P)Ltd. vs. Superintendent, CCE & ST, [2014]52 taxmann.com 132 (Rajasthan)

.

FACTS:

The petitioner in this writ petition questioned the legality and validity of the demand notice issued by the superintendent under the O/O which was subject matter of appeal and stay application before the CESVAT. The stay application was listed before CESVAT but could not be heard and got adjourned either due to non-availability of Bench or for not reaching. The impugned demand notice was issued after 8 months from the date of filling of stay application essentially with reference to Circular No. 967/01/2013-CX dated 01/01/2013.It was submitted that, in Mangalam Cement  Ltd.vs. Superintendent of Central Excise 2013(290 ) ELT 353 (Raj), the said circular was declared non est by the High Court and the respondents were prohibited from making coercive recovery  proceedings pursuant to the impugned circular.

HELD:

The High Court observed that in the Manglam Cement’s case (supra) vide Final Order dated 01/01/2013, the Court undisputedly held the said circular non-est in so far as it relates to the situation where the appeals with the application had been filed they remained pending for the reasons not  attributable to the assessee in any manner. The Court got dismayed by the fact that despite such a considered decision, the superintendent, with impunity chose to issue demand notice with reference to very same circular, although the legal position in this regard was concluded more than seven months back and in no uncertain terms. Having regard to the circumstances,the court not only admitted the writ petition staying the operation of the impugned order but also directed to initiate contempt proceedings against the concerned superintendent.