Home Case Index All Cases Central Excise Central Excise + HC Central Excise - 2013 (11) TMI HC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2013 (11) TMI 240 - HC - Central ExciseWrit Petition Maintainable OR Not – Alternate Remedy available – Whether the order passed by the CESTAT in terms of Section 35F of the Excise Act, 1944 or Section 129-E of the Customs Act, 1962 is appealable in terms of Section 35G of the Excise Act 1944 or Section 130 of the Customs Act, 1962 - Held that:- The order passed by the CESTAT in terms of Section 35F of the Central Excise Act, 1944 or Section 129-E of the Customs Act, 1962 is appealable in terms of Section 35G of the Excise Act, 1944 or Section 130 of the Customs Act, 1962. There is no contra decision rendered by the Apex Court subsequent to Raj Kumar Shivhare's case [2010 (4) TMI 432 - SUPREME COURT] is placed before us. On the other hand, by following the above decision, a subsequent decision of the Apex Court in Satyawati Tandon case was rendered by holding that before availing remedy under Article 226 of the Constitution, a person must exhaust the remedies available under the statute, which decision has been discussed supra. Appellate remedy is available against those orders u/s 35G of the Central Excise Act, 1944 or u/s 130 of the Customs Act, 1962 - all the petitions are liable to be dismissed on the ground of maintainability - all the petitions are dismissed as not maintainable, however by giving liberty to the petitioners to file appeal under Section 35G of the Central Excise Act, 1944 or under Section 130 of the Customs Act, 1962, wherever it applies - writ petitions are dismissed only on the ground of maintainability, the petitioners are entitled to canvass the correctness of the order passed by the Tribunal in their appeal by raising all the grounds as well as the substantial questions of law available to them – liberty is granted to file appeal, the parties are directed to maintain status quo as on date.
|