9911796707
TMI Blog2014 (10) TMI 199X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... by the Commissioner of Customs, Central Excise & Service Tax (Appeals-II), Hyderabad (hereinafter referred to as 'the Commissioner'). 3. This case has got a bit interesting background. The writ petitioner approached this Court earlier in 2013 by way of filing Writ Petition No.28600 of 2013 for the following relief: "to issue an appropriate writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus: (a) declaring as arbitrary, illegal, indiscrete, high handed, discriminatory and affront to doctrine of legitimate expectations as well as doctrine of equity, fairness & reasonableness (i) the Notice C.No.V/04/01/CE/Arrears dated 10.01.2013 addressed to the Petitioner Company; (ii) the N ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ular appeal under the aforesaid Section before the Commissioner. It is also stated that the appellate authority is reluctant, rather refused, to accept the appeal. Then, necessary application was made for registering the appeal. That application was not disposed of. Then, the petitioner again, approached this Court by filing Writ Petition No.8090 of 2014 for consideration of the aforesaid application for resubmission. This Court in that Writ Petition passed order, dated 19.03.2014, which is as follows: "At this stage, we think that no order should be passed on merit, except directing respondent No.1 - Commissioner of Customs, Central Excise & Service Tax (Appeals-II), Hyderabad, to deal with and dispose of the applicatio ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sion does not permit such appeal and hence, he dismissed the same. 9. Taking note of the contentions of Sri S.Ravi and also the counter submissions of the learned counsel for the Revenue on the aforesaid admitted fact, while agreeing with the submissions of Mr. Ravi, we are of the view that the Commissioner should not have expressed the opinion differently to that of the opinion given by this Court. When the High Court has in clear terms ruled that appeal lies, the Commissioner under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, had no option, but to proceed with the hearing of the appeal on merit. According to us, perhaps, this aspect escaped the notice of Commissioner. He simply accepted misplaced opinion of Department's Representative. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
