M/S. Karur K.C.P. Packkagings vs. The Commissioner Of Central
Held
The Court noted the submissions made by both parties. The learned Standing Counsel for the respondents stated that an inter-departmental communication dated August 2, 2021, from the Deputy Commissioner (CGST), Trichy, confirmed that the respondents had accepted the petitioner's request regarding the classification of their goods. The petitioner's counsel acknowledged receipt of this letter and endorsed the view that the prayer had been met. Considering that the respondents' stand, as communicated via the letter dated August 2, 2021, effectively granted the petitioner's request, the Court found no further action was required. Consequently, the writ petition was disposed of by recording the statement made by the respondents' side. No costs were awarded.
Facts
M/s. Karur K.C.P. Packagings Limited (the petitioner) filed a writ petition seeking a Mandamus to prevent the Superintendent of Central Excise (the third respondent) from endorsing "Classification Dispute" or similar remarks on their export documents, specifically concerning Flexible Intermediate Bulk Containers (FIBC). The petitioner manufactures and exports these goods. The respondents are various authorities within the Central Excise department. The writ petition was filed in 2014, and the matter came up for hearing on August 10, 2021.
Key Issues
1. Whether the Court should issue a Writ of Mandamus directing the Superintendent of Central Excise to refrain from making endorsements of "Classification Dispute" on the petitioner's export documents concerning Flexible Intermediate Bulk Containers (FIBC). Petitioner's Argument: The petitioner sought a writ to prevent the revenue authorities from creating a dispute regarding the classification of their exported goods, which could impede their export process. Revenue's Argument: The learned Standing Counsel for the respondents submitted that an inter-departmental communication dated August 2, 2021, from the Deputy Commissioner (CGST), Trichy, indicated that the respondents had accepted the petitioner's request for classification. Therefore, the prayer sought by the petitioner had been accomplished, and the writ petition could be disposed of on this basis.
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 10.08.2021 CORAM: THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE R.SURESH KUMAR and M.P(MD) No.1 of 2014 M/s.Karur K.C.P. Packkagings Limited, Rep. by its General Manager (Works) Mr.T.Madhaiyan, S.F.No.199-201, Mayanur (Post) - 639 108. Krishnarayapuram (Taluk), Karur District.
...Petitioner Vs. 1.The Commissioner of Central Excise, No.1, Williams Road, Cantonment Trichy - 620 001. 2.The Assistant Commissioner of Central Excise and Service Tax Karur Division, No.15, 3rd Floor, Gowripuram Extension, Anna Nagar, Karur - 639 002. 3.The Superintendent of Central Excise Karur IV Range, No.15, Gowripuram Extension, Anna Nagar, Karur - 639 002. ... Respondents PRAYER: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a Writ of Mandamus, forbearing the third respondent herein from making endorsement as "Classification Dispute" or any other endorsement of similar nature in the ARE-I Certification Column or in any other export documents regarding classification of the goods manufactured and exporting by the petitione
The judgment continues below.
Read the full judgment
A free account opens 10 full GST judgments a month (one account works on both bharattax.net and this site). Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.
The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.
Reproduced from the public record of the Madras High Court. Verify against the court's own copy before relying on it. Income tax judgments are on bharattax.net.