R.D.DHANUKA, S.M.MODAK
Bombay Dyeing And Manufacturing Company Limited – Appellant
Versus
Deputy Commissioner Of Cgst & Cx, Div-ix, Mumbai Central Gst Commissioner – Respondent
JUDGMENT
R.D. Dhanuka, J. - Rule.
2. Mr. Kantharia, learned Counsel appearing for the Respondent waives service.
3. By this Petition, filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the Petitioner has impugned the Show Cause Notice dated 5 January 2007 annexed as Exhibit 'A' to the Petition.
4. The Petitioner has filed reply to the Show Cause Notice within four weeks from the date of receipt of the said notice and did not get any further communication from the Respondent for hearing or any adjudication upon the said Show Cause Notice from the Respondent till today. The Petitioner has thus filed this Petition.
5. Mr. Patkar, learned Counsel appearing for the Petitioner invited our attention to the said Show Cause Notice and also to the averments made by the Respondents, more particularly, paragraph-5 of the Affidavit-in-Reply dated 27 August 2021. He submits that the Petitioner was never informed that the said Show Cause Notice was kept in call book at any point of time. He submits that the Respondent cannot be allowed to proceed with the Show Cause Notice after more than 14 years. In support of this submission, learned Counsel relied upon the unreported judgment in the case of Par
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.