9911796707
TMI Blog2000 (5) TMI 258X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... itted that the appellants had purchased centrifuge machine from M/s. Penwalt India Ltd. for the purpose of pollution control on payment of central excise duty @ 15.75%; that in terms of Notification No. 78/90 duty payable was only 5% as it was intended for use in pollution control plant; that the Assistant Collector rejected the refund claim filed by M/s. Penwalt India Ltd., under adjudication order dated 14-7-1992, as the condition of possessing of a certificate from a specified officer to the effect that the goods were intended for pollution control purpose was not satisfied. The certificate was produced much after clearance of the goods. The learned Advocate further submitted that M/s. Penwalt India Ltd. did not file appeal in view of th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tics Ltd. v. Hindustan Photofilms Mfg. Co. Ltd., 1997 (91) E.L.T. 502 (SC) wherein it was held that phrase 'person aggrieved' is wider than the phrase 'party aggrieved' and a third party may be treated to be legally aggrieved, if he is able to show that he has a direct interest in the goods involved in the adjudication. He also referred to the decision in the case of Tamil Nadu Newsprint and Paper Ltd. v. U.O.I., 1993 (66) E.L.T. 562 (Madras), wherein it was held that petitioner who is ultimately to bear the burden of duty has right to challenge the order in the writ petition. Learned Advocate submitted that applying the ratio of these two decisions the appellants have locus standi and are the person aggrieved in terms of Section 35B of the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... meant "Not really a person who is disappointed of a benefit which he might have received, if some other order had been made. A 'person aggrieved' must be a man who had suffered a legal grievance, a man against whom a decision has been pronounced which had wrongfully deprived him of something; or wrongfully refused him of something, or wrongfully affected his title to something." As per Corpus Juris Secundum, Vol. IV, "Broadly speaking a party or a person is aggrieved by a decision when, only when, it operates directly and injuriously upon his personal pecuniary or proprietory rights. Hon'ble Supreme Court in Adi Pherozshah Gandhi v. H.M. Seervai, Advocate General of Maharashtra, 1970 (2) SCC 484 observed that any person who feels disappoin ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... laim the excess duty paid by them from their supplier. Their legal right has not been affected by the adjudicating order passed by the Assistant Collector. In the absence of any legal grievance they cannot be considered to be aggrieved person within the meaning of Section 35 of the Central Excise Act. Similarly the decision of the Madras High Court in Tamil Nadu Newspaper case is not applicable to the facts of the present matter as the petitioner therein intervened at the original stage by writ petition and not at the appeal stage. We, therefore, hold that the Collector (Appeals) was right in holding that the Appellants had no right to dispute the adjudicating order passed by the Assistant Collector. Accordingly, the appeal filed by them ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
