Back
PUNJAB & HARYANA HIGH COURT
M.M.Kumar and Augustine George Masih JJ.
Commissioner Of Central Excise, Chandigarh
Versus
Hari Concast (P) Ltd.
C.E.A. No. 35 of 2007,
Decided On : APRIL 20, 2009
Limitation - Central Excise Act, 1944 - The court upheld the order of the Tribunal, stating that the proceedings for imposing penalty initiated after the expiry of five years were not warranted. The judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of State of Punjab v Bhatinda District Cooperative Milk Producers Union Ltd. was relied upon to establish the reasonable period of limitation for initiating proceedings.
Fact of the Case:
The revenue filed an appeal challenging the order of the Tribunal, which was passed after the expiry of the statutory period of limitation for initiating penalty proceedings.
Finding of the Court:
The court upheld the order of the Tribunal, stating that the appeal did not warrant admission and was liable to be dismissed.
Issues: The issue was whether the proceedings for imposing penalty, initiated after the expiry of the statutory period of limitation, were valid.
Ratio Decidendi: The court relied on the judgment of the Supreme Court to establish the reasonable period of limitation for initiating proceedings, and found no ground to interfere in the order passed by the Tribunal.
Final Decision: The appeal failed and was dismissed.
M.M.Kumar, J.
1. The revenue has filed the present appeal under Section 35G of the Central Excise Act, 1944 (for brevity, #24;the Act#25;) challenging order dated 3-8-2006 [2007 (213) E.L.T. 404 (Tri.-Del.)], passed by the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal, New Delhi (for brevity, #24;the Tribunal#25;).
2. It is conceded position that proceedings against the respondent-assessee for imposing penalty were initiated after the expiry of period of five years. Although there is no statutory period of limitation yet reasonable period of limitation for initiating proceedings is five years. In that regard reliance may be placed on the judgment of Hon#25;ble the Supreme Court in the case of State of Punjab vBhatinda District Cooperative Milk Producers Union Ltd., 2007 (217) E.L.T. 325 (S.C.) = (2007) 11 SCC 363. It has been held that if no provision is made regarding period of limitation for exercising revisional jurisdiction under the Punjab General Sales Tax Act, 1948, then maximum period of five years is regarded as reasonable period. Therefore, we find no ground to interfere in the order passed by the Tribunal. The appeal does not warrant admission and is, thus, liable to be dismissed. Accordingly the appeal fails and the same is dismissed.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
