2012 (2) TMI 474 - HC - Central Excise

Summary

Issues involved: Jurisdiction of High Court under Article 226 for entertaining a writ petition when an appeal lies against the decision of the Tribunal.

Summary:
The High Court of Bombay dismissed a petition filed under Article 226 challenging an order of the CESTAT. The CESTAT had referred certain points of difference to a Third Member, but the petition was filed on an aspect already concluded by the decision. The impugned order held that duty is chargeable under the proviso to Section 3(1) of the Central Excise Act, 1944 on clandestine removals of goods, which is appealable to the Supreme Court. The petitioner argued that the Tribunal should have followed a Supreme Court judgment, but the Court declined to exercise its writ jurisdiction under Article 226, stating that when an appeal is available in law, parties should be relegated to that remedy. The Court emphasized the importance of judicial propriety, especially when the appeal lies before the Supreme Court. The petition was dismissed, and no costs were awarded.