9911796707
TMI Blog2014 (10) TMI 199X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... aring of the appeal on merit. Perhaps, this aspect escaped the notice of Commissioner - matter restored before commissioner - Decided in favour of petitioner. - WRIT PETITION No.18823 OF 2014 - - - Dated:- 8-7-2014 - SRI KALYAN JYOTI SENGUPTA AND SRI SANJAY KUMAR, JJ. For the Appellant : Mr. S.Ravi, For the Respondent : Mr Gopalakrishna Gokhaley JUDGEMENT Learned counsel for the Revenue submits that he does not want to file any counter-affidavit. We also feel that in the matter of this nature, no counter-affidavit is required. 2. This Writ Petition has been filed challenging the order, dated 18.06.2014 passed by the Commissioner of Customs, Central Excise Service Tax (Appeals-II), Hyderabad (hereinafter referred ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ench of this Court by judgment and order, dated 07.10.2013, relevant portion of which is as follows: That apart, under Section 35 of the Central Excise Act, 1944 (for short the Act') an efficacious remedy of appeal is provided which can be pursued by any person aggrieved by any decision passed under the Act. Therefore, without exhausting the alternative remedy of appeal provided under the Act the petitioner cannot straight away invoke the jurisdiction of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. 5. Accepting the aforesaid judgment and order, the writ petitioner filed a regular appeal under the aforesaid Section before the Commissioner. It is also stated that the appellate authority is reluctant, rather refu ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Court but also a gross breach of quasi-judicial discipline. In an unchallenged decision, the Division Bench of this Court opined that appeal is alternative remedy. The aforesaid Commissioner being an authority subordinate to this Court within the meaning of Article 227 of the Constitution of India, has not rendered any decision independently at all rather accepted the opinion of the department and dismissed the appeal holding the same being non-maintainable. 8. On the other hand, learned counsel for the Revenue says that perhaps, the Commissioner was of the view that statutory provision does not permit such appeal and hence, he dismissed the same. 9. Taking note of the contentions of Sri S.Ravi and also the counter submissions of the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
