9911796707
TMI Blog1998 (9) TMI 97X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... on as being not maintainable because the petitioner has not exhausted the alternative remedy of appeal provided under the Central Excise and Customs Act. 2.It is not in dispute that vide order dated 17-1-1992 (Annexure P6), petitioner was called upon to show cause by the Assistant Collector, Central Excise Division, Jalandhar, as to why the amount of Rs.4,455/- (BED Rs.4,050/- plus SED Rs. 405/-) ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ned counsel for the respondents. In the case of Titaghur Paper Mills Co. Ltd. v. State of Orissa A.I.R. 1983 S.C. 603, their Lordships of the Supreme Court held:- "Under the scheme of the Act, there is a hierarchy of authorities before which the petitioners can get adequate redress against the wrongful acts complained of. The petitioner have the right to prefer an appeal before the prescrib ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... dies where the question of fact would have been properly agitated and asserted. 3.In the present case, petitioner has come to this Court at the stage when only a show cause notice has been issued to it. Petitioner ought to have given reply to the show cause notice and in case the same is decided against the petitioner, it has a right to file an appeal before the Commissioner, Central Excise. Sinc ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
