1997 (8) TMI 85 - HC - Central Excise

Summary

Issues Involved:
1. Classification of pumps on base frames as 'trailer' under Erstwhile Tariff Item 34 and Chapter sub-heading 87.16.
2. Maintainability of the writ petition in the High Court under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution.
3. Jurisdiction of the High Court in light of Section 35L of the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944.

Summary:

Issue 1: Classification of Pumps on Base Frames
The Tribunal's order classified pumps on base frames as an identifiable product known as 'trailer' under Erstwhile Tariff Item 34 and Chapter sub-heading 87.16 of the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985. This classification pertains to the rate of excise duty payable under the Act.

Issue 2: Maintainability of the Writ Petition
The petitioner argued that based on the Supreme Court's judgment in L. Chandra Kumar v. Union of India, no appeal can be preferred before the Supreme Court under Section 35L of the Act unless the remedy before the High Court under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution is exhausted. Additionally, the petitioner contended that the cost of litigation before the Supreme Court is prohibitively high, making the appeal remedy inefficacious.

Issue 3: Jurisdiction of the High Court
The High Court noted that Section 35L of the Act provides that any order passed by the Appellate Tribunal relating to the rate of duty of excise or the value of goods for purposes of assessment can only be appealed to the Supreme Court. The Court emphasized that the High Court's jurisdiction under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution has not been specifically barred by the Act. However, the High Court's writ jurisdiction is limited to ensuring procedural fairness and not to sit in appeal over the Tribunal's order.

Conclusion:
The High Court concluded that the writ petition cannot be entertained on merits as the petitioner has an alternative remedy by way of appeal to the Supreme Court. The Court dismissed the writ petition, stating that no good ground for judicial review under the writ jurisdiction was made out. The rights and contentions of the parties on merits remain open.