Revenue is unable to appoint a Special Counsel; so seeks adjournment
STRANGE things seem to happen in the department nowadays, all in the name of Revenue mobilisation. They book a case, issue a show cause notice with myriad allegations and even adjudicate it pretty quickly. But when they are taken to the CESTAT by the aggrieved appellant or for that matter they themselves are in appeal courtesy a Review order by the learned Committee of Chief Commissioners, they develop cold feet and are unable to argue the case themselves.
So, to put up a brave front, they hire the services of a Special Counsel, who almost always is a retired Revenue officer - for they can afford to pay him only!
Sometimes, they find difficulty in getting him too for reasons best known to them.
In the present case, in the matter of an O-in-O passed by the CCE, Pune-I , the Revenue had filed an Early Hearing application probably because the amount involved was in excess of One crore rupees. The CESTAT had heard their application on 06.06.2012 and an early hearing was granted. The matter was listed for final hearing on 13.08.2012. Nothing happened on that date and the matter was listed again on 21.08.2012 and on 10.10.2012 and on both the occasions, an adjournment was sought by the Revenue!
As if the urgency had vanished by that date.
Again, when the matter was listed on 20.12.2012, the Commissioner (AR) representing the Revenue once again sought an adjournment on the ground that the Revenue wants to engage a Special Counsel.
The Bench noted that in the interest of justice, the adjournment request is accepted. However, the Bench directed that on the next date of hearing if the Revenue is unable to argue the matter, the matter would be decided on the merits.
Now, the matter is listed for hearing on 20.02.2013.
Hopefully, by this date the Special Counsel is found and appointed...
(See)