9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (1) TMI 1757X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... y order had been passed by the officers of the same rank which is not permissible as per law , the contention of the petitioner will have to be sustained. Petition disposed off. - W.P.No.16682 of 2016 and WMP No.14412 of 2016 - - - Dated:- 24-1-2017 - THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV SHAKDHER For the Petitioner : Mr.T.Chezhiyan For the Respondent : Mr.T.Pramod Kumar Chopda, Standing Counsel ORDER 1. This writ petition is directed against the order dated 22.01.2016, passed by the Government of India (in short GOI ), Ministry of Finance, Department of Revenue. 1.1. The impugned order has been passed by the GOI, via its Joint Secretary, in exercise of power under Section 129 DD of the Customs Tax Act, 1962 (in sho ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... reason, according to the learned counsel for the petitioner, which propels the petitioner to take such a stand is the fact that the Officer, who exercised the jurisdiction in the matter was of the same rank, as that of the Commissioner of Appeals, whose order was assailed before him. 4.1. To be noted, the impugned order has been passed by the Joint Secretary to the GOI. It is common ground that the Commissioner of Appeals holds the same rank as the Joint Secretary to GOI. 4.2. Therefore, according to the learned counsel, this singular fact has impregnated the impugned order with a jurisdictional flaw. In support of his submission, learned counsel for the petitioner relies upon the judgement of the Punjab and Haryana High Court in NV ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... were based on individual fact situation involved therein. Thus, the respondent cannot derive any advantage from the said pronouncements. 8. It is not in dispute before me that the Commissioner of Appeals and the Joint Secretary of the GOI, who exercised the power of the revisional authority, hold the same rank. 9. Having regard to the observations made in NVR Forging's case, the contention of the petitioner will have to be sustained. 10. Accordingly, the impugned order is set aside, with liberty to the GOI to pass a fresh order within a period of eight (8) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of the order, after corrective measures are taken. 10.1. In case, the requisite corrective steps are not taken, respondents No.4, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
