Law:

Section:

Section 95 of the Finance (No. 2) Act, 1998 - Kar Vivad Samadhan Scheme - During pendency of matter regarding chargeability of excise duty in case of appellants before Supreme Court, they were directed to pay 50 per cent of demand and to furnish bank guarantee for balance - On culmination of matter clarificatory order was passed by High Court that bank guarantee could not be encashed unless demand was reassessed on basis of of Supreme Court - Thereafter, show-cause notice was issued to appellants stating that on basis of that order department had determined value as per orders - Thereafter, Assistant Commissioner wrote to appellants with particulars of demand payable after adjustment of payment already made - Appellants filed a declaration under Kar Vivad Samadhan Scheme, 1998, which was rejected on ground that adjudication had already taken place and that tax arrears in question were not in dispute on date of declaration - High Court dismissed writ petition against said order - Whether since before passing said order a personal hearing was given and appellants were called upon to pay balance after setting off of amount already paid, there was an adjudication of demand - Held, yes - Whether since there was an adjudication of demand and since no appeal or reference or writ petition was admitted or pending before appellate Court or High Court or Supreme Court and no application for revision was made before Central Government, provisions of Kar Vivad Samadhan Scheme were not applicable - Held, yes FACTS The appellants were job workers, who processed fabric on behalf of others. While the matter was pending before the Supreme Court, regarding chargeability of the excise duty in the case of appellants, they were directed to pay 50 per cent of the demand and to furnish bank guarantee for the balance. After the culmination of those matters, the department sought to enforce the bank guarantee. A clarificatory order was passed by the High Court to the effect that the bank guarantee could not be encashed unless the demand was reassessed on the basis of the of the Supreme Court. Thereafter a notice was issued to the appellants on 31-3-1994 stating that on the basis of…

Deprecated: trim(): Passing null to parameter #1 ($string) of type string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 492