TMI Blog2022 (5) TMI 589X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. In the present case, the principle of natural justice appears to have been adhered to. Opportunity of hearing has been accorded to the petitioner. Petitioners are not challenging the vires of the statute or delegated legislation. The respondent authorities had the jurisdiction to pass the orders. Only because according to the petitioner, orders are erroneous or that there is some infraction of procedure, that would not be sufficient to term the order as an excess of jurisdiction or without jurisdiction. The factual dispute is about the valuation and the manner in which it had been valued is not accepted by the Commissioner or the Assessment Officer. Same can be challenged on m ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... India. The learned counsel relies upon the judgment of the Apex Court in the case of Whirlpool Corporation vs. Registrar of Trade Marks, Mumbai and Others (1998) 8 SCC 1 and submits that the High Court can exercise its powers under Article 226 of the Constitution of India in spite of the alternative statutory remedies, specially in a case where the authority against whom the Writ is filed is shown to have had no jurisdiction or had purported to usurp jurisdiction without legal foundation. 5. In the present case, the impugned orders are passed in complete contravention of instructions contained in Circular and IR No.62/2018 dated 31.10.2018 issued by SVB and hence is without Jurisdiction. The learned Senior Advocate relying upon the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the authorities have failed to adhere to the procedure and the circulars. The import pricing methodology adopted by the petitioner was thoroughly investigated by the SVB and the IR was issued recommending acceptance of the declared values. The past as well as the current imports made by the petitioner followed the same pricing methodology. The respondents erred in law to doubt the declared values relying on past imports made by the petitioner itself at higher prices, however, such higher prices were directly attributable to firm orders received in India for those transactions which were due to a variety of factors. 7. The SVB in its IR having accepted the pricing methodology of the petitioner, there was no case for the respondence to dou ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... wholly without jurisdiction. The First Appellate Authority, in its operative part of the order directed the SVB to correct the evaluation. In fact, the matter ought to have been remanded to SVB. 9. The learned Senior Advocate further submits that the petition if it is relegated to the remedy of appeal, would face unnecessary hardship. The petitioner will be required to file 111 and 88 Appeals which will take long time to decide and the petitioner will have to face unnecessary erroneous assessments. The facts and circumstance of the case warrant interference of this court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India inspite of availability of alternate remedy. 10. Mr. Mishra, the learned counsel for the respondents submits that the p ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... remedy is certainly not an anathema for this court to exercise its writ jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. The rule of alternate remedy is a rule of self-restraint. If substantive remedy of Appeal is available, the court would be slow to exercise its writ jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. The Apex Court has held that Writ petition can be entertained in in exceptional circumstances where there is : (i) a breach of fundamental rights; (ii) a violation of the principles of natural justice; (iii) an excess of jurisdiction; or (iv) a challenge to the vires of the statute or delegated legislation. 13. Reference can be had to the judgement of the Apex court in the case of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ble. There is no impediment for the petitioner to avail the remedy of Appeal. Only because the petitioners will have to file 111 and 88 Appeals would be no ground to invoke Writ Jurisdiction of this court. 16. In the light of the above, we are not inclined to entertain the Writ Petitions. 17. Both the Writ Petitions are disposed of with liberty to the petitioner to avail alternate remedy, as is permissible in law. In that event, all contentions on merits are kept open. (VINAY JOSHI, J.) (S.V.GANGAPURWALA, J.) At this stage, learned Senior Counsel for the Petitioner states that the Petitioner had assailed the order before this Court and now that the Petitioner is relegated to the Appellate Authority, the authority may not raise ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
