Modern Syntex (I) Limited vs. Assistant Commissioner Of CGST And Central Excise, Division Vi

Facts

Modern Syntex (I) Limited (the petitioner) filed a writ application seeking directions for the finalization of assessment proceedings related to project imports made between July 1995 and July 1997. The petitioner had executed bonds and furnished bank guarantees totaling Rs. 4,23,37,569/- and deposited Rs. 32,11,115/-. The bills of entry were provisionally assessed, and goods were cleared for home consumption. However, final assessment remained pending due to the need for an installation certificate from the jurisdictional officer. The petitioner had made several communications, including a reminder in December 2018 and a letter in February 2019, highlighting the delay and the monetary losses incurred due to bank guarantee charges amounting to Rs. 96,87,616/-. The respondent is the Assistant Commissioner of CGST and Central Excise, Division VI.

Held

The Court acknowledged the significant delay in finalizing the assessment proceedings, which had been pending since the imports were made between 1995 and 1997. The Court noted the petitioner's repeated attempts to get the matter resolved and the financial losses incurred due to the extended period. While the petitioner sought various reliefs including the release of bank guarantees, refund of deposit, compensation for losses, and permission to sell machines, the Court's primary concern was the inordinate delay. The Court did not delve into the merits of the petitioner's claims regarding the release of securities or compensation, stating that the issue was still at large before the Assistant Commissioner. Instead, the Court directed the Assistant Commissioner of Central Excise, Vadodara, to immediately take up the matter and conclude the assessment proceedings with an appropriate order within two months from the date of receiving the writ. The Court also instructed the Assistant Commissioner to intimate the petitioner if any documents were required for the finalization of the assessment, and the petitioner was directed to act promptly upon receiving such intimation. The Court explicitly stated that its concern was only the delay and not the merits of the litigation.

Key Issues

1. Whether the Court should direct the respondent authority to initiate and complete the final assessment proceedings within a reasonable time, considering the significant delay since the imports were made between 1995 and 1997. 2. Whether the respondent authority should be directed to release the bank guarantees dated 15.07.1995 and 31.07.1996 and refund the deposited amount of Rs. 32,11,115/-, and compensate the petitioner for bank guarantee charges of Rs. 96,87,616/-, and permit the sale of machines. Petitioner's Arguments: The petitioner argued that the prolonged delay in finalizing the assessment proceedings, despite their repeated follow-ups and the respondent's acknowledgment of the need for finalization as per a Customs letter dated 15.10.2012, has caused substantial monetary losses due to bank guarantee charges and other inconveniences. They relied on the communications made to the respondent authority, including the reminder dated 15.12.2018 and the letter dated 07.02.2019, to demonstrate the lack of action. Revenue's Arguments: The judgment notes that the respondents filed an affidavit-in-reply, but the Court did not enter into the merits of the litigation, focusing solely on the delay. No specific arguments from the revenue regarding the delay or the petitioner's claims were recorded.