9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (10) TMI 1065X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of them under Section 130 of the Customs Act, 1962 (Customs Act) and two of them under Section 35G of the Central Excise Act, 1944 (Excise Act) challenge individual orders passed by the Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (Tribunal) at Mumbai. 2. These appeals were heard together on a preliminary objection raised by the RespondentRevenue about hearing of these appeals at the principal seat of this Court at Mumbai. This for the reason that the order in appeals arise out of dispute emanating from the districts which have been allotted the benches of this court. Thus giving rise to a preliminary issue as under : "Whether the appeals arising under Section 130 of the Customs Act and Section 35G of the Central Excise Act from the orders of the Tribunal at Mumbai, can be presented and heard before the principal seat of the High Court, even when the impugned order of the Tribunal arises out of places which are allotted to the Benches at Nagpur and Goa? 3. At the very outset it is clarified that there is no issue/dispute with regard to the jurisdiction of this Court to entertain these appeals and decide the grievances of the Appellants to the orders of the Tribuna ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... and Latur which lie to the High Court of Bombay shall be presented to the Additional Registrar of that High Court at Aurangabad and shall be disposed of by the Judges sitting at Aurangabad. Provided that the Chief Justice may, in his discretion, order that any case arising in any such District shall be heard at Bombay; Provided further that the Chief Justice may, in his discretion, order that any case presented at Bombay be heard at Aurangabad. 3. All appeals, applications, references and petitions including petitions for exercise of powers under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, arising in the State of Goa, which lie to the High Court of Bombay, shall be presented to the Special Officer at Panaji, Goa and shall be disposed of by the Judges sitting at Panaji, Goa; Provided that the Chief Justice may, in his discretion, order that any case arising in the State of Goa shall be heard at Bombay: Provided further that the Chief Justice may, in his discretion, order that any case presented at Bombay be heard at Panaji, Goa." 6. Reliance is also placed upon the amendment made to the Appellate Side Rules on 27th October, 2014 by insertion of Chapter XXIVA, whic ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... otted in terms of the Appellate Side Rules. 8. On the other hand, Mr. Sridharan, learned Senior Counsel a/w Mr. Shah and Mr. Jain, learned Counsel a/w Mr. Shetty appearing for the appellants submit that the preliminary issue is concluded in favour of the Appellants. This by the decisions of this Court in Vinar Ispat Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise, (2012) 275 ELT 34 and in Facor Steel Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise, 320 ELT A357 where an identical objection by the Revenue was rejected. Thus the issue is no longer res integra. It is further emphasized that the decision of this Court in Vinar Ispat Ltd. (supra) merely followed the decision of the Constitutional Bench of the Supreme Court in Sri. Nasiruddin Vs. State Transport Appellate Tribunal, (1975) 2 SCC 671 where similar objection arising between the Lucknow Bench and the principal seat at Allahabad of the Allahabad High Court in terms of the United Provinces High Court (Amendment) Order, 1948 was resolved. This by holding that it is open to the litigant to select either of the benches of the Court he would like to approach being dominus litis. It is emphasized that the decision of this Court in Vinar Ispat Ltd. (su ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... jurisdiction of the Principal Bench at Allahabad and the appellate order i.e. the order of the Tribunal being passed within the jurisdiction of the bench at Lucknow. The Apex Court after analyzing the provisions of paragraph 14 of the United Provinces High Courts (Amalgamation) Order, 1948 (referred to as order) (similar to Chapter XXXI Rules 1, 2 and 3 of the Appellate Side Rules) held that both the Courts at Allahabad and Lucknow would have jurisdiction to entertain a petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. It held that it would be entirely for the party to choose which of the two benches it would seek to move as part of the cause of action would have been arisen in both places i.e. where the original order was passed as well as at the place where the appellate order was passed. In such cases, the litigant who is the dominus litis has an option to choose which bench he would select to proceed with his case. Reliance was also placed by the Appellant upon the decision of the Supreme Court in Manju Varma Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh, 178 ELT 64 and the decision of this Court in Kishore Rungta & Ors. Vs. Punjab National Bank & Ors. 2004 (4) Mah.L.J. 115 and in Haji Abd ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ction of two different Courts. This, as the Bombay High Court which includes the principal seat at Mumbai and the benches at Aurangabad, Nagpur and Goa, all undoubtedly have jurisdiction. Therefore, both the aforesaid decisions will not govern the issue for our consideration. Secondly the amendment by insertion of Chapter XXIVA of the Appellate Side Rules with effect from 27th October 2014 specifically provides for the manner to determine before which benches of this court would appeals under Section 130 of the Customs Act and 35G of the Central Excise Act lie. Thus the filing of these appeals i.e. tax appeals would be governed by the newly inserted Chapter XXIVA read with Chapter XXXI of the Appellate Side Rules. This newly inserted Chapter XXIVA of the Appellate Side Rule provides the test for the bench before which the statutory appeal would lie as not the situs of the Tribunal but the place where the dispute arose i.e. originated from. In none of the decisions being relied upon by the appellant, did the Court have to consider provisions as found in Chapter XXIVA of the Appellate Side Rules as in these cases. It is the above Chapter XXIVA read with Chapt ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... eals have to be presented at that bench (including the principal seat) which has been allocated the place where the dispute has arisen and not the place where the appellate authority is situated. 13. In the above view, the impugned orders passed by the Tribunal in excise appeals before us relate to and arise out of disputes relating to manufacture of excisable goods which have taken place at Nagpur. Therefore, the Excise Appeal Nos. 28 of 2017 and 105 of 2017 before us have to be heard by the bench of this Court at Nagpur. So far as the customs appeals are concerned, the import of the goods giving rise to the dispute between the parties in Customs Appeal Nos. 19 of 2017 and 20 of 2017 arose at Goa. Therefore, these two appeals relating to the customs have to be heard at the bench of this Court at Goa. The dispute with regard to custom duty in Customs Appeal Nos. 25 of 2017 arose at Nagpur and, therefore, to be heard at Nagpur. We further find that the Commissioner and the Officers of the respondent Revenue who would instruct the Advocates will be available at the Benches and the dispute also arose at that place as the liability of the appellant to payment of customs duty and excis ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
