Case Laws
Acts
Notifications
Circulars
Classification
Forms
Manuals
Articles
News
D. Forum
Highlights
Notes
🚨 Important Update for Our Users
We are transitioning to our new and improved portal - www.taxtmi.com - for a better experience.
⚠️ This portal will be discontinued on 31-07-2025
If you encounter any issues or problems while using the new portal,
please
let us know via our feedback form
so we can address them promptly.
Home
2024 (5) TMI 1274 - HC - Central ExciseMaintainability of petition - availability of alternative remedy - requisite documents relied upon not supplied - opportunity of hearing not provided - violation of principles of natural justice - Recovery of short paid Central Excise Duty. Maintainability of petition - availability of alternative remedy - HELD THAT - It hardly needs to be stated that the rule of alternate remedy is not a Thumb Rule to non-suit every litigant approaching the writ Court. It all depends upon the facts and circumstances of each case and the requirement of doing justice to the party aggrieved. This Court finds support in its view by the judgment passed in the case of M/S GODREJ SARA LEE LTD. VERSUS THE EXCISE AND TAXATION OFFICERCUM- ASSESSING AUTHORITY ORS. 2023 (2) TMI 64 - SUPREME COURT wherein it has been observed that availability of alternative remedy does not operate as an absolute bar to the maintainability of a writ petition and that the rule which requires a party to pursue such remedy provided by a statute is a rule of policy convenience and discretion evolved by the judiciary rather than a rule of law. Therefore in all the cases the entities answering Article 12 of the Constitution of India cannot press into service the doctrine of alternative remedy as the China Wall against the invocation of writ jurisdiction. Failure to supply documents reled upon - opportunity of hearing not provided - violation of principles of natural justice - Recovery of short paid duty - HELD THAT - Undisputedly the petitioner has not been supplied with the documents on the basis of which show cause notice was issued and despite repeated communications from the petitioner the said documents were not provided due to which the petitioner would not be in a position to give reply to the show cause notice which culminated into passing of final order and judgment of recovery - even on remand the respondent no.2 without adhering to the directions of Commissioner (appeals) i.e. without providing requisite documents and in the absence of affording opportunity of hearing has again proceeded to pass a final order of recovery alongwith levying of penalty thereby again violating the principles of natural justice. Under such circumstances the final order of recovery dated 29.03.2024 is not allowed to stand. The matter is remanded back to the respondent no.2 for fresh adjudication - Petition allowed by way of remand.
|