Home Case Index All Cases Central Excise Central Excise + HC Central Excise - 2008 (9) TMI HC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2008 (9) TMI 390 - HC - Central ExciseWrit jurisdiction - Alternative remedy - Whether the countervailing duty paid under the provisions of the Customs Act, is payment of Central Excise duty or additional customs duty? - Held that:- The learned Single Judge, after keeping the cases pending for more than seven years from the date of their filing, i.e. in 1992/1993, on the request of the learned Standing Counsel appearing for the Central Government awaiting the decisions of the Central Government and after the issuance of Central Government Notification No. 104 of 1983, dated 28-12-1993, clarifying on the matter by making amendment to the relevant Notification, it was not desirable for the learned single Judge to ask the appellant-writ petitioner-assessee-Madura Coats Limited, to avail of the alternative remedy of appeal before the CEGAT/CESTAT. The principles enunciated by the Supreme Court in the case of Hyderabad Industries Limited [ 1995 (7) TMI 368 - SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] and [1999 (5) TMI 29 - SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] are applicable to the present cases, having been not disputed by the learned Additional Solicitor General appearing for the Revenue, he having accepted the fact that the classification of the "goods" of the writ petitioner-assesee-Madura Coats Limited, are covered under Sl. No. 3 (as extracted in the Table in the earlier paragraph of this judgment) and that there is no dispute in the fact that the assessee has already paid the additional customs duty on the same, we are of the view that no useful purpose would be served by remanding the cases to the departmental authorities for considering the same issue which had already been settled by the Supreme Court. W.P Allowed.
|