2008 (4) TMI 54 - SC - Central Excise

Constitutionality of Section 9-D(cause of action) of the Central Excise & Salt Act 1944 HC dismissed appeal on the premise that some appeals are pending before SC involving the said question SC has given liberty to challenge constitutionality of Sec. 9D before HC - impugned question not decided by HC in this case - interest of justice would be subserved if the impugned judgments are set aside and the matters are remitted back to the High Court for consideration thereof afresh

Summary

Issues:
Challenge to constitutionality of Section 9-D of the Central Excise and Salt Act, 1944.

Analysis:
The appellants challenged the constitutionality of Section 9-D of the Act, which was dismissed by the High Court due to pending appeals before the Supreme Court on similar questions. The pending appeals involved different issues and did not address the constitutionality of Section 9-D. The bar on raising constitutional questions before statutory authorities or courts while deciding appeals was emphasized, citing relevant legal precedents. A specific order clarified the procedure for invoking Section 9-D in cases involving witnesses, allowing challenges without restricting the validity of the provision itself.

The respondents argued against permitting the appellants to raise the constitutional question, contending that no cause of action had arisen. The High Court did not address the constitutionality issue or the objection regarding the cause of action. In the interest of justice, the Supreme Court set aside the High Court judgments and remitted the matters for fresh consideration. The directive was given for expeditious disposal of the writ petitions within three months, with all contentions remaining open for further examination.

This detailed analysis of the judgment highlights the legal arguments, precedents, and procedural aspects involved in the challenge to the constitutionality of Section 9-D of the Central Excise and Salt Act, 1944, providing a comprehensive overview of the case and its implications for further proceedings.