Orissa Manganese & Minerals Ltd. v. Commr. of CGST & CE

SUBSCRIBE FOR FULL CONTENT


The Tax Publishers 2024 TaxPub(GST) 878 (Jhar-HC) IN THE JHARKHAND HIGH COURT RONGON MUKHOPADHYAY & DEEPAK ROSHAN JJ. Orissa Manganese & Minerals Ltd. v. Commr. of CGST & CE W.P. (T) No. 2786 of 2023 20 February, 2024 Petitioner by: Indrajit Sinha, Advocate Kumar Vaibhav, Advocate Respondents by: Amit Kumar, Advocate ORDER *Deepak Roshan, J* Heard learned counsel for the parties. 2. The petitioner has preferred the instant writ application for the following reliefs: (a) For quashing the order dated 25-4-2023 bearing DIN-20230460XX000000BC3C (Annexure-11 hereto) whereby the refund application made by the Petitioner seeking refund along with interest of a pre-deposit amount of Rs. 50,00,000 & Rs. 1,56,31,698 [totalling to Rs. 2,06,31,698) made in Excise Appeals preferred by the Petitioner before the CESTAT, Kolkata has been rejected; (b) Upon quashing the aforesaid order dated 25-4-2023, for a direction upon the Respondents to immediately and forthwith refund the aforesaid pre-deposit amount of Rs. 2,06,31,698 to the Petitioner together with applicable statutory interest; 3. The brief facts of the case are that the petitioner has preferred four appeals before the CESTAT against the aforesaid Orders-in-Original. On 10-3-2015, the petitioner made a pre-deposit of Rs. 1,56,31,698 in CESTAT. Further, the Petitioner also made a pre-deposit of Rs. 50,00,000 in CESTAT. In the meantime, a petition against the Petitioner under section 7 of the Insolvency & Bankruptcy Code, 2016 was admitted by the NCLT, Kolkata. The resolution professional issued a specific notice to the Respondent No. 1 to file its claims. The resolution plan of Ghanshyam Mishra & Sons Pvt. Ltd. (GMSPL) was approved by the NCLT, Kolkata. Further, the petitioner applied before NCLT Cuttack, praying for the extinguishment of claims/demands of Revenue against the Petitioner. NCLT Cuttack allowed the said application and passed an order that the claims of Revenue cannot be entertained and further, the typographical errors in this order were corrected vide order dated 11-5-2022. Thereafter, the petitioner filed an application before CESTAT for withdrawal of its pending appeals and the CESTAT dismissed the Petitioners appeals as withdrawn. Thereafter, Petitioner preferred another application before Respondent No. 1 seeking a refund of pre-deposit as per section 35-F of the Central Excise Act but Petitioners application was rejected vide order passed by Respondent No. 3. SUBSCRIBE FOR FULL CONTENT

The Tax Publishers 2024 TaxPub(GST) 878 (Jhar-HC)

IN THE JHARKHAND HIGH COURT

RONGON MUKHOPADHYAY & DEEPAK ROSHAN JJ.

Orissa Manganese & Minerals Ltd. v. Commr. of CGST & CE

W.P. (T) No. 2786 of 2023

20 February, 2024

Petitioner by: Indrajit Sinha, Advocate Kumar Vaibhav, Advocate

Respondents by: Amit Kumar, Advocate

ORDER

Deepak Roshan, J

Heard learned counsel for the parties.

2. The petitioner has preferred the instant writ application for the following reliefs:

(a) For quashing the order dated 25-4-2023 bearing DIN-20230460XX000000BC3C (Annexure-11 hereto) whereby the refund application made by the Petitioner seeking refund along with interest of a pre-deposit amount of Rs. 50,00,000 & Rs. 1,56,31,698 [totalling to Rs. 2,06,31,698) made in Excise Appeals preferred by the Petitioner before the CESTAT, Kolkata has been rejected;

(b) Upon quashing the aforesaid order dated 25-4-2023, for a direction upon the Respondents to immediately and forthwith refund the aforesaid pre-deposit amount of Rs. 2,06,31,698 to the Petitioner together with applicable statutory interest;

3. The brief facts of the case are that the petitioner has preferred four appeals before the CESTAT against the aforesaid Orders-in-Original. On 10-3-2015, the petitioner made a pre-deposit of Rs. 1,56,31,698 in CESTAT. Further, the Petitioner also made a pre-deposit of Rs. 50,00,000 in CESTAT. In the meantime, a petition against the Petitioner under section 7 of the Insolvency & Bankruptcy Code, 2016 was admitted by the NCLT, Kolkata. The resolution professional issued a specific notice to the Respondent No. 1 to file its claims. The resolution plan of Ghanshyam Mishra & Sons Pvt. Ltd. (GMSPL) was approved by the NCLT, Kolkata. Further, the petitioner applied before NCLT Cuttack, praying for the extinguishment of claims/demands of Revenue against the Petitioner. NCLT Cuttack allowed the said application and passed an order that the claims of Revenue cannot be entertained and further, the typographical errors in this order were corrected vide order dated 11-5-2022. Thereafter, the petitioner filed an application before CESTAT for withdrawal of its pending appeals and the CESTAT dismissed the Petitioners appeals as withdrawn. Thereafter, Petitioner preferred another application before Respondent No. 1 seeking a refund of pre-deposit as per section 35-F of the Central Excise Act but Petitioners application was rejected vide order passed by Respondent No. 3.