2019 (9) TMI 114 - HC - Central Excise

Maintainability of petition - non-compliance with the order - Section 35F of the Central Excise Act - HELD THAT - It is made clear that this Court has not expressed any of its views with regard to the applicability of the decision rendered by the the Hon ble Apex Court to the petitioner s case and that the Tribunal would be in its own liberty to arrive at a conclusion. The matter is remanded back to the first respondent for fresh consideration - petition allowed by way of remand.

Summary

Issues involved:
1. Dismissal of petitioner's appeal for non-compliance of order under Section 35F of the Central Excise Act.
2. Reconsideration of orders in writ petitions based on subsequent favorable decision by the Supreme Court.
3. Entitlement of petitioner for relief and reconsideration by the first respondent.
4. Setting aside of orders and remand for fresh consideration by the first respondent.
5. Liberty granted to petitioner to file additional grounds for consideration.
6. Disposal of writ petitions and closure of connected miscellaneous petitions.

Issue 1: Dismissal of petitioner's appeal for non-compliance of order under Section 35F of the Central Excise Act.
The writ petitions revolve around the order dated 6-11-2001, which dismissed the petitioner's appeal due to non-compliance of the said order made under Section 35F of the Central Excise Act.

Issue 2: Reconsideration of orders in writ petitions based on subsequent favorable decision by the Supreme Court.
The Learned Counsel for the petitioner argued that a decision by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in favor of the petitioner required the orders impugned in the writ petitions to be reconsidered.

Issue 3: Entitlement of petitioner for relief and reconsideration by the first respondent.
The Learned Standing Counsel for the respondents contended that the petitioner should not be extended the opportunity for non-compliance of the order. However, the court held that the petitioner's entitlement for relief can be reconsidered by the first respondent in light of the subsequent development in favor of the petitioner.

Issue 4: Setting aside of orders and remand for fresh consideration by the first respondent.
The court set aside the orders dated 6-11-2001, 24-8-2001, and 3-1-2002 made in final Order Nos. 1925/2001, Mis. Order No. 246/2001, and impugned Order No. 24/2002 in Appeal No. 993/2000/Mas, remanding the matter back to the first respondent for fresh consideration.

Issue 5: Liberty granted to petitioner to file additional grounds for consideration.
The petitioner was given the liberty to file an application raising additional grounds before the first respondent, specifically touching upon the subsequent development. The first respondent was directed to pass appropriate orders expeditiously based on the merits and in accordance with the law.

Issue 6: Disposal of writ petitions and closure of connected miscellaneous petitions.
With the above observations and directions, the writ petitions were disposed of, and the connected miscellaneous petitions were closed without any costs imposed.