Delay in adjudication of show cause notices is a violation of principles of natural justice.

JUDGMENT :

R.D. Dhanuka, J.

Rule. Mr. Mohamedali Chunawala, learned counsel for the respondent no.1 and Mr. Bangur, learned counsel for the respondent no.2 waives service. Mr. Jetly, learned Senior Counsel for the respondents in Writ Petition (L) No. 1068 of 2021 waives service. By consent of parties, both the petitions were heard together and are being disposed of by common order.

Facts in Writ Petition No. 1194 of 2022 :-

2. By Writ Petition No. 1194 of 2022 filed by the petitioner under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has prayed for a writ of certiorari for quashing and setting aside the Show Cause Notice F.No.V.Adj(30)/Kurla/CR-67/Commr/2005/M.II/409 dated 17th February, 2006 and seeks writ of prohibition to prohibit the respondents from adjudicating the said show cause notice against the petitioner.

3. Ms. Bhargava, learned counsel for the petitioner invited our attention to various show cause notices annexed to the petition and would submit that there was no communication from the respondents since 17th February, 2006 in respect of the said show cause notice and submits that the respondent ought to have adjudicated upon the said show cause notice expeditiously. The petitioner cannot be made to suffer because of the delay on the part of the respondent no.2 in proceeding with the said show cause notice.

4. It is submitted that the petitioner was never informed about the objection raised by the department to the query raised by the office of the Comptroller and Accountant General nor was informed about the show cause notice allegedly having been transferred to call book. Learned counsel for the petitioner placed reliance on judgment of Gujarat High Court in case of Apollo Tyres Ltd. v/s. Union of India, 2020 (372) E.L.T. 52 (Guj.) and judgment of this Court delivered on 14th February, 2022 in case of The Bombay Dyeing and Manufacturing Company Limited v/s. Deputy Commissioner of CGST & CX, Div-IX, Mumbai Central GST Commissioner in Writ Petition No. 2874 of 2021.

5. Respondent No.2-Commissioner issued a show cause notice dated 17th February, 2006 to the CNH Industrial (India) Private Limited for recovery of Rs.6,52,64,433/- on the ground that the credit was alleged to have been wrongly availed on capital goods by the petitioner during the period between June 2001 to December 2001 and for demanding interest and penalty thereon.

6. On 18th June, 2008, the name of the said company i.e. ‘Fiat India Private Limited’ was changed to ‘New Holland Fiat (India) Private Limited’. On 12th August, 2016, the name of the said company i.e. ‘New Holland Fiat (India) Private Limited’ was changed to ‘CNH Industrial (India) Private Limited’.

7. On 19th February, 2019, the Assistant Commissioner, Adjudication Section sent an intimation to the petitioner for personal hearing. On 3rd June, 2019, the petitioner requested the respondent no.2 to provide copies of all the documents relevant to the said show cause notice, as available on record from the files of the respondents, since there was no communication from the respondents, since the date of issuance of show cause notice till the date of said intimation dated 19th February, 2019. There was no response to the said letter addressed by the petitioner. The petitioner thus filed this petition.

8. Mr. Mohamedali Chunawala, learned counsel for the respondent no.1 and Mr. Bangur, learned counsel for the respondent no.2 submitted that the show cause notice was issued based on CERA objection raised in March 2003 on the issue of wrong availment of Cenvat Credit on Capital Goods without physical receipt thereof in their factory and seeking reversion of inadmissible Cenvat Credit. The said CERA objection was contested, however, with a view to safeguard the interest of the revenue. The show cause notice was issued on 17th February, 2006 and was transferred to call book as per circular dated 14th December, 1995.

9. It is submitted that the Central Board of Excise & Customs vide letter dated 16