2016 (8) TMI 664 - HC - Central Excise

Validity of impugned order - passed by the Revisionary Authority - officer was of the same rank as is the appellate authority - Held that - the impugned order was passed by the Joint Secretary to Government of India who was also Commissioner of Central Excise and Customs. For the detailed reason that the order in appeal as well as revisionary order had been passed by the officers of the same rank is not permissible as per law. Hence, the impugned order dated 21.11.2012, passed by the Revisionary Authority is set aside, however, with liberty to the revenue to proceed afresh in accordance with law. - Writ petition disposed of

Summary

Issues:
Challenge to order of Revisionary Authority for being passed by an officer of the same rank as the appellate authority.

Analysis:
The petitioners challenged the order of the Revisionary Authority dated 21.11.2012, which accepted the revision filed by the department against the order passed by the Commissioner (Appeals) on 29.3.2011. The Commissioner (Appeals) had set aside the order passed by the adjudicating authority on 30.4.2010. The main issue raised was that the order passed by the Revisionary Authority cannot be sustained as it was passed by an officer of the same rank as the appellate authority, which is not permissible under the law.

Legal Position:
The court referred to a previous judgment in M/s NVR Forgings v. Union of India, where it was held that revision by an officer of the same rank as the appellate authority is not permissible. The respondents did not dispute this legal position. The court also mentioned the judgment in M/s Prakash Pipes Industries Limited's case, where it was established that revision by an officer of the same rank was not allowed.

Judicial Precedents:
The court discussed various judgments, including one from the Delhi High Court and another from the Supreme Court, to support the legal position that revision by an officer of the same rank as the appellate authority is not valid. The court emphasized that the decisions were based on individual fact situations and cannot be used by the respondents to their advantage in this case.

Decision:
Considering the above legal principles and precedents, the court allowed the petitions and set aside the impugned order dated 21.11.2012 passed by the Revisionary Authority. The court granted liberty to the State to proceed afresh in accordance with the law, without prejudice to the rights of the parties. The detailed reasons for setting aside the order were recorded in the judgment, and the writ petition was disposed of accordingly.