A. P. RAVANI, J. U. MEHTA, J.

( 1 ) THE petition has its roots in a show cause notice dated 28/12/1983 alleging that the petitioners have illicitly removed powerloom cotton fabrics (worth about rupees sixty two crores) without payment of Excise Duty. Petitioners lost upto Supreme Court in first round. In second round the petitioners retreated and withdrew the petition unconditionally without permission of the Court to file fresh petition. This is third round initiated in May 1986 Petition has remained at the threshold and the proceedings pursuant to show cause notice have also got stuck up on account of ad interim order passed by this Court. Is the petition maintainable ? While examining and answering the question let us also try to understand as to why and how the matter has remained st the admission stage till today.

( 2 ) THE petitioner No. 1 is a Private Limited Company carrying on the business of Cotton Textile and more particularly textile fabrics manufactured in power loom sector. Petitioner No. 2 is a share-holder and Director of petitioner No. 1 Company. Sometime in the month of October 1983 the petitioners factory premises were searched and pursuant thereto a show cause notice dated 28/12/1983 has been served upon the petitioner. The allegation in show cause notice is that the petitioners have wrongfully availed of exemption notification in respect of power loom cotton fabrics manufactured and cleared by them illicitly. between 24-11-1979 and 31-7-1983. As disclosed in the affidavit-in-reply goods valued at Rs. sixtytwo crores seventy seven lakhs fiftythree thousand and ninetyseven (Rs. 62 77 53 97 are alleged to have been removed illicitly. (As stated at the Bar Excise Duty payable on this much quantity of cotton fabrics would be around ten crores of rupees ). After the service of the notice upon the petitioner the petitioner challenged the legality and validity of the notice by filing Special Civil Application No. 4611 of 1984.

( 3 ) WHILE disposing of the aforesaid petition on 13/09/1984 the Court (Coram: P. S. Poti C. J. and R. C. Mankad J.) observed as follows:no final action Pursuant to the show cause notice bad been taken. It is for the petitioners to show cause. Their complaint before us is that certain documents on which they would like to rely though the excise authorities have indicated that they do not propose to rely on them are not made available to them despite their request and this may vitiate the proceedings now taken as it would be in violation of the principles of natural justice. Though we have been addressed elaborately by the petitioners counsel we have not been persuaded to agree that interference at this stage is called for. It is open to the petitioners to urge all their contentions in answer to the show cause notice including their contention as to why the copies of the documents sought for by them are necessary for the proper conduct of their defence and as to how non-supply of those copies would vitiate the proceedings. We expect the excise authorities to properly look into all the contention taken by the petitioners including the contention of non-supply of copies. It is not necessary to consider in this petition whether those copies would be relevant and whether if not supplied now the proceedings would have been held to be bad. We do not think on the facts averred in the petition any case has been made out for interference. Hence we are dismissing the petition as pre-mature. Dismissed.

( 4 ) AGAINST the aforesaid order of this Court the petitioner preferred Special Leave to Appeal (Civil) No. 11569 of 1984 before the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court (dismissed the Special Leave to Appeal (Civil) No. 11569 of 1984 by passing the following order 6/05/1985 the Point as to the limitation before us can be raised in reply to the show cause notice received by the petitioners. The request for inspection of documents can so be raised by the petitioners before the Collector of Customs Central Exc

Click Here to Read the rest of this document