Gujarat High Court High Court

====================================== vs Mr Harin P Raval For The on 29 July, 2008

Gujarat High Court
====================================== vs Mr Harin P Raval For The on 29 July, 2008
Bench: D.A.Mehta And Devani, Harsha Devani
  
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	

 
 


	 

SCA/8755/2008	 4/ 4	ORDER 
 
 

	

 

IN
THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
 

 


 

SPECIAL
CIVIL APPLICATION No. 8755 of 2008
 

 
======================================


 

MESSRS
SUSHMA SYNTHETICS PVT. LTD. AND ANOTHER
 

Versus
 

UNION
OF INDIA AND OTHERS
 

======================================
Appearance : 
MR
PARESH M DAVE for the Petitioners 
MR HARIN P RAVAL for the
Respondents 
====================================== 

 
	  
	 
	  
		 
			 

CORAM
			: 
			
		
		 
			 

HONOURABLE
			MR.JUSTICE D.A.MEHTA
		
	
	 
		 
			 

 

			
		
		 
			 

and
		
	
	 
		 
			 

 

			
		
		 
			 

HONOURABLE
			MS.JUSTICE H.N.DEVANI
		
	

 

 
 


 

Date
: 29/07/2008 

 

 
 
ORAL
ORDER

(Per
: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE D.A.MEHTA)

1. This
petition challenges order dated 19.7.2007 made by Commissioner
(Appeals), whereby the appeal of the petitioner was dismissed for not
complying with order dated 19.6.2007 directing the petitioner to
deposit a sum of Rs.14,54,742/- plus Rs.50,000/- towards penalty for
the Director, which was to be deposited by 16.7.2007.

2. The
petitioner carried the matter in appeal before Tribunal who also
confirmed the order of Commissioner (Appeals) after extending the
time for making the deposit as directed by Commissioner (Appeals).
The said order was made on 28.11.2007 granting 8 weeks to the
petitioner to deposit the amount as directed by Commissioner
(Appeals). The petitioner thereafter moved the Tribunal seeking
modification of stay order on the basis of financial hardship being
faced by the petitioner. The application was rejected vide order
dated 15th February, 2008 by the Tribunal. It is at this
stage that the petitioner approached the High Court.

3. On
1.7.2008, the following order came to be made by the Court.

1. ýSNOTICE
for final disposal returnable on 04.07.2008.

2. Mr.Paresh
Dave, learned counsel for the petitioner Company, states that
undertaking indicating the schedule of payment shall be submitted on
the returnable date.

3. Mr.Harin
Raval, learned Assistant Solicitor General, waives service of notice
for respondent No.1. Direct srevice is permitted on the rest.ýý

4. On
22.7.2008, the learned advocate for the petitioner prayed for further
time to place on record the indicative schedule of payment along with
undertaking in compliance with the earlier order dated 1.7.2008. The
schedule proposed by the petitioner is as under:

SCHEDULE
OF PAYMENT/DEPOSIT

Sr.

No.

Amount
to be deposited

(Rs.)

Date
of depositing

1

Rs.2,60,000/-

On
or before 20th August, 2008

2

Rs.2,60,000/-

On
or before 20th September, 2008

3

Rs.2,60,000/-

On
or before 20th October, 2008

4

Rs.2,60,000/-

On
or before 20th November, 2008

5

Rs.2,64,742/-

On
or before 20th December, 2008

5. Heard
the learned counsel appearing for the parties.

6. In
light of the undertaking dated 28th July, 2008, the
petitioner is directed to abide by the aforestated schedule and
deposit the amount as undertaken by the petitioner. It will be open
to the petitioner to complete the total amount of deposit even prior
to 31st December, 2008 so as to ensure that the petitioner
is saddled with minimum interest liability.

7. Upon
the petitioner depositing the amount as directed by Commissioner
(Appeals), the order dated 19.7.2007 made by Commissioner (Appeals)
dismissing the appeal shall stand quashed and set aside and the
appeal restored to file of Commissioner (Appeals) to be decided on
merits. However, before such restoration takes place, the petitioner
shall obtain necessary certificate of having discharged the liability
of the entire amount as per order dated 19.6.2007 obtained from the
Range Superintendent and on production of the same before the office
of Commissioner (Appeals), the appeal shall stand restored to file.
Needless to state that granting of installments as per aforesaid
schedule will not absolve the petitioner from liability to pay
interest in accordance with law.

8. Subject
to what is stated hereinbefore, the petition stands disposed of
accordingly. The petitioner shall pay costs quantified at a sum of
Rs.2500/-

(D.A.

MEHTA, J.)

(HARSHA
DEVANI, J.)

shekhar/-