CBEC Instructions on Streamlining Process of Adjudication
IT has come to the notice of the Board that the High Court of Bombay in its judgment dated 15.07.2015 in the case of Lanvin Synthetics Pvt. Ltd. Vs Union of India reported in has quashed the Show Cause Notice dated 13.03.1997 and prohibited the department from passing any adjudication order as the Show Cause Notice was not adjudicated for 17 long years as no records were available. The High Court in its order at para 12 has observed:
"If the law postulates early end to such proceedings and there is no period of limitation prescribed, does not mean that the proceedings initiated could be concluded at the sweet will and fancies of the department."
The High Court in para 11 of said order has further quoted the Supreme Court in the case of Citedal Fine Pharmaceuticals - , where the Apex Court was pleased to hold that in the absence of any period of limitation, it is settled law that every authority should exercise the power within a reasonable period.
The Board painfully notes that in spite of various monitoring mechanisms in existence, such occurrence could not be avoided. The matter has been viewed seriously and all the adjudicating authorities are directed to pass adjudication orderswithin time limits as prescribed, so that the above said instance is not repeated in future.
Board also refers to its letter F.No.8Adated 11.03.2015 (copy available on CBEC website), on the subject of 'Steps needed to be taken to improve tax administration', wherein the need for passing the adjudication order within the specified time has been emphasised.
Board wants all the Commissioners to also explore the possibility of scanning and digitization of all papers connected with adjudication and litigation matters.
Board wants the Chief Commissioners to bring to the notice of the field formations these instructions for scrupulous compliance.
CBEC F.No.280/45/2015-CX.8A., Dated September 17, 2015