It cannot be said that voluntary statements made by the officials of the petitioners before the Senior Intelligence Officer would constitute a pre-show cause notice consultation, as stipulated under paragraph 5 of the 2017 Master Circular.
Writ petition— The limited issue which arises for consideration in the captioned writ petitions concerns the applicability of the instruction dated 21.12.2015 bearing F. No. 1080/09/DLA/MISC/15/757 and the Master Circular dated 10.03.2017 issued by CBIC.
It is the submission of the petitioners that as per paragraph 5 of the 2017 Master Circular, the contesting respondents were mandatorily required to hold pre-show cause notice consultation with the petitioners prior to initiation of the proceedings under the Finance Act, 1994.
The defence taken by the contesting respondents is that pre-show cause notice consultation had occurred and, in that context, reliance is placed upon the statements made by the petitioners’ officials before the Senior Intelligence Officer under Section 14 of the Central Excise Act, 1944, as made applicable to Service Tax matters vide Section 83 of the Finance Act, 1994.
This court is of the view that “voluntary statements” recorded before the Senior Intelligence Officer cannot constitute pre-show cause notice consultation as envisaged in the paragraph 5 of the 2017 Master Circular.
Held that— It cannot be said that voluntary statements made by the officials of the petitioners before the Senior Intelligence Officer would constitute a pre-show cause notice consultation, as stipulated under paragraph 5 of the 2017 Master Circular.
It cannot be said that voluntary statements made by the officials of the petitioners before the Senior Intelligence Officer would constitute a pre-show cause notice consultation, as stipulated under paragraph 5 of the 2017 Master Circular.
Writ petition— The limited issue which arises for consideration in the captioned writ petitions concerns the applicability of the instruction dated 21.12.2015 bearing F. No. 1080/09/DLA/MISC/15/757 and the Master Circular dated 10.03.2017 issued by CBIC.
It is the submission of the petitioners that as per paragraph 5 of the 2017 Master Circular, the contesting respondents were mandatorily required to hold pre-show cause notice consultation with the petitioners prior to initiation of the proceedings under the Finance Act, 1994.
The defence taken by the contesting respondents is that pre-show cause notice consultation had occurred and, in that context, reliance is placed upon the statements made by the petitioners’ officials before the Senior Intelligence Officer under Section 14 of the Central Excise Act, 1944, as made applicable to Service Tax matters vide Section 83 of the Finance Act, 1994.
This court is of the view that “voluntary statements” recorded before the Senior Intelligence Officer cannot constitute pre-show cause notice consultation as envisaged in the paragraph 5 of the 2017 Master Circular.
Held that— It cannot be said that voluntary statements made by the officials of the petitioners before the Senior Intelligence Officer would constitute a pre-show cause notice consultation, as stipulated under paragraph 5 of the 2017 Master Circular.