Jurisprudentiol –Tuesdya's cases

By Vijay Kumar

Legal Corner Icon — the image was hosted by the publisher and was not captured.Central Excise

Refund claim of 75% of penalty on ground that duty along with interest was paid before issue of SCN – Held, since petitioner did not challenge adjudication order, it attains finality and binds petitioner - HC while exercising jurisdiction does not sit in appeal over adjudication orders: High Court

THE High Court observed that since the petitioner did not challenge the order dated February 1, 2001, in view of the Apex Court's decision in Flock (India) Pvt. Ltd 2002-TIOL-208-SC-CX, the said order attained finality and was therefore binding on the petitioners. It was further observed that the High Court while exercising jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution does not sit in appeal over adjudication orders and/or appellate orders. The Writ Petition was summarily dismissed.

Income Tax

It is simple and plain that edifice of assessment cannot be created on foundation of a time barred notice - no notice u/s.143(2), as claimed by Revenue authorities, was issued – assessment quashed: ITAT

BLOCK return was filed on 15.5.2000. The filing of return on a Receipt counter on one day and the issuance of notice u/s.143(2) on the very next day would mean that all the steps from the receipt of return on the Receipt counter till the issuance of notice got completed within one day's time. Such steps would include the receipt of return on the Receipt counter of the department; the Receipt clerk, after entering the necessary particulars in the relevant register, handing over the same to the office of the concerned Assessing Officer; the office of the AO receiving it from the receipt clerk; placing of such return before the AO; the AO pursuing the return and all the accompanying documents; jotting down the points on which the explanation of the assessee is required ; finalizing such points and accordingly sending the notice.

Customs

DRI directed to defreeze EEFC accounts of Petitioner and pay costs of Rs. 5000/- for failure to complete investigation and issue SCN even after four years – High Court

FREEZING of EEFC Accounts for more than four years in connection with investigation into undervaluation of imported computer parts – If an authority exercising extensive statutory and coercive powers is unable to ensure completion of investigation within a reasonable period, it would be unfair to keep the bank accounts frozen indefinitely – DRI directed to de-freeze bank accounts forthwith – Costs of Rs. 5000/- awarded.

See our columns Tomorrow for the judgements