Supreme Court: Imminent Death Not Required For a Statement to Qualify as Dying Declaration  ||  SC: HC Cannot Grant Pre-Arrest Bail Without Quashing FIR; Accused Must Approach Sessions Court First  ||  SC: Agreed Interest Rate Cannot Be Challenged as Exorbitant; Arbitrator Cannot Override Contract  ||  SC: Agreed Interest Rate Cannot Be Challenged as Exorbitant; Arbitrator Cannot Override Contract  ||  SC: GST Exemption on Residential Lease Applies When Building is Sub-Leased for Hostel/PG Use  ||  Rajasthan High Court: Universities Cannot Retain Students’ Original Documents for Pending Fees  ||  NCLT: Damages from Contractual Disputes Cannot Form Basis for Initiating Insolvency Proceedings  ||  Del HC: Pre-SCN Consultation is Unnecessary in Large-Scale GST Fraud Cases with Complex Transactions  ||  Calcutta HC: Unilaterally Appointed Arbitrator Violates Natural Justice and Sets Aside the Award  ||  Raj HC Upholds Padmesh Mishra’s AAG Appointment, Noting Advocacy Skill isn’t Tied to Experience    

Panacea Biotec Ltd vs. Commissioner of Central Goods and Service Tax - (Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal) (06 Dec 2023)

No demand of duty amount can be confirmed without issuing show cause notice and following the procedure prescribed under Section 11A of the Central Excise Act

MANU/CJ/0137/2023

Excise

The present appeal is directed against the impugned order passed by the Commissioner (Appeals) deciding two appeals of the Appellant whereby the Commissioner (Appeals) has allowed the appeal against the demand of interest and imposition of penalty upon the appellant but upheld the Assistant Commissioner order rejecting the refund claim of Rs. 19,55,010.

It is a settled law that, no demand of duty amount can be confirmed without issuing show cause notice and following the procedure prescribed under Section 11A of the Central Excise Act, 1942. The main issue involved in this case is demand of differential duty of Rs. 19,55,010 for the period March, 2012 to May, 2013 without issuing show cause notice and without affording an opportunity of hearing to the appellant which is in violation of the statutory provision and the principles of natural justice. The Hon'ble Supreme Court has consistently held in various decisions held that show cause notice is a condition to demand any tax.

In the present case also, no show cause notice as required in law was issued to the Appellant and no opportunity of hearing as required under law was accorded. The rejection of refund claim of Rs. 19,55,010 deposited by the appellant under protest is liable to be refunded to the appellant as prescribed by the law. Accordingly, the Revenue is directed to refund the said amount along with interest as prescribed by law. Appeal allowed.

Tags : REFUND CLAIM   REJECTION   LEGALITY  

Share :        

Disclaimer | Copyright 2025 - All Rights Reserved