Home Case Index All Cases Central Excise Central Excise + HC Central Excise - 2018 (9) TMI HC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2018 (9) TMI 1582 - HC - Central ExciseViolation / breach of Rule 8(3A) of the Central Excise Rules, 2002 - vires of Rule 8(3A) of the Central Excise Rules, 2002 - Whether the Tribunal committed substantial error of law by allowing Respondent's appeal without examining the case on merit in spite of charge made out in the notice emphasizing contravention of the provisions of Rule 8(3A) of Central Excise Rules, 2002? - Held that:- Once the provision has been declared ultra vires by any High Court then one has to proceed on the basis that the provision which has been declared as unconstitutional is non-existant. Therefore, unless a contrary decision is given by any other competent Court, the Tribunal in the state has to proceed with the decision of the other High Court as it is the law of land and binding upon it. When a provision has been declared unconstitutional by a Court, then the Tribunal is bound to follow it as held by this Court in C.C.E., Mumbai – III Vs. Valson Dyeing Bleaching & Printing Works [2010 (9) TMI 338 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT], where the Tribunal allowed the Appeal of the Respondent holding that the basis of the proceeding therein was on account of breach of notification No. 42 of 1998 (NT) 10th December, 1998 - Nothing has been shown as to why the decision of our Court in Valson Dyeing should not be followed. Appeal dismissed.
|