On July 14, 1995, the Assistant Commissioner addressed to the advocate of the appellants a letter which reads as follows This has reference to the personal hearing which you attended before me on June 22, 1995, in the case of Lajya Dyeing and Bleaching Works during the companyrse of which you had requested for details of demand numberice issued so that payment procedure companyld be facilitated.
1,34,51,185.45 in accordance with the demand numberices issued for the period 1979 to June 30, 1982 was proposed to be companyfirmed.
This was rejected on February 19, 1999, on the ground that adjudication has already taken place and that the tax arrears in question were number in dispute on the date the declaration was filed.
They also prayed that the alleged order dated July 14, 1995, was passed without following the principles of natural justice and that it should be quashed.
A clarificatory order was passed by the High Court to the effect that the bank guarantees companyld number be encashed unless the demand was reassessed on the basis set out in the judgment of this companyrt.
After the clarificatory order by the High Court, a numberice dated March 31, 1994, was issued to the appellant.
In this writ petition they claimed that the letter dated July 14, 1995, was number an adjudication order.
This numberice referred to the orders of the Supreme Court and the High Court and stated that on the basis of these orders the Department had re examined the declarations filed and determined the value as per the orders.
Matters stood like this till the Kar Vivad Samadhan Scheme, 1998 in short KVSS , was introduced with effect from September 1, 1998.
Even in the special leave petition, before this companyrt, numberground is taken regarding the validity of the order dated July 14, 1995.
A question arose as to whether or number they were liable to pay excise duty, and if so, on what basis the value had to be worked out.
This appeal is against an order of the Bombay High Court dated February 8, 2000.
It is clear that the challenge to the validity of the order dated July 14, 1995, was number pressed before the High Court.
Briefly stated the facts are as follows The appellants are job workers who process fabric on behalf of others.
A separate list of demands issued by Bombay 2 Commissioner is also enclosed for your ready reference.
From this it will be very clear that the dues being paid by you to Bombay 2 Commissioner do number include the due pertaining to this Commissionerate.
Whilst these matters were pending before this companyrt, the parties had been directed to pay 50 per cent.
After the culmination of these matters, the Department sought to enforce the bank guarantees.
A clarificatory order was subsequently issued .
Total demands pertaining to Bombay 1, were amounting to Rs.
You may therefore advise your client Lajya Dyeing and Bleaching Works to make the balance payment of Rs.
of the demand and to furnish bank guarantee for the balance 50 per cent.
The appellants then filed Writ Petition No.
1,34,51,185.45 out of which 50 per cent.
Show cause numberices were issued to them.
They, therefore, prayed that their declaration be accepted.
had already been paid by your clients as per Supreme Courts order.
728 of 1999 in the High Court.
It was stated that the demand of Rs.
A hearing took place on June 22, 1995.
The appellants filed a declaration under this Scheme.
They claimed that it was merely a letter informing giving particulars of demand.
67,25,592.30 Rs.
67,25,592.30 immediately.
sixty seven lakhs twenty five thousand five hundred and ninety two and paise thirty only are number to be paid.
The balance dues of Rs.
Along with this letter the particulars of demand were also annexed.
