2001 (8) TMI 134 - HC - Central Excise

Summary

Issues:
- Classification of the product "Nivaran 90" under Chapter sub-heading 3003.30 of Central Excise Tariff Act
- Jurisdiction of the first respondent to demand duty
- Admissibility of the writ petition despite a pending appeal before CEGAT
- Apprehension regarding fairness in the appeal process
- Transfer of the appeal from CEGAT Chennai Bench to Bangalore Bench

Analysis:

The petitioner, a manufacturer of "Nivaran 90," classified as an Ayurvedic medicine, sought a writ of certiorari challenging the order passed by the first respondent, alleging it to be illegal, arbitrary, and contrary to Supreme Court principles. The first respondent issued a show cause notice proposing duty demand for a specific period. Despite a previous court direction to proceed with adjudication, the first respondent passed an Order-in-Original, leading to the current writ petition. The petitioner argued that the first respondent disregarded the previous court decision and assumed jurisdiction without merit, prompting the filing of the present writ petition, which was admitted with interim stay granted.

The respondents contended that the petitioner had also appealed before CEGAT, which was pending, and accused the petitioner of obtaining an interim order by suppressing this fact. The petitioner, supported by a Supreme Court order in their favor, expressed concerns about the pending appeal's outcome due to the Madras Bench of CEGAT's contrary view. The court emphasized that the Supreme Court's judgment is binding on all tribunals and courts, but the applicability depends on each case's facts. To ensure justice, the court directed the transfer of the appeal from CEGAT Chennai Bench to Bangalore Bench for unbiased adjudication, allowing the petitioner a fair opportunity to present their case without apprehension.

The court dismissed the writ petition, instructing the petitioner to approach CEGAT Chennai Bench for transferring the appeal to Bangalore Bench. The judgment aimed to uphold fairness in the appeal process and ensure justice is not only done but also seen to be done. Consequently, the connected WMPS were also dismissed without costs, concluding the legal proceedings in the matter.