Kerala High Court
M/S. Punalur Paper Mills Limited vs Commissioner Of Central Excise And ... on 13 February, 2014
Author: P.R. Ramachandra Menon
Bench: P.R.Ramachandra Menon
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON
THURSDAY, THE 13TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2014/24TH MAGHA, 1935
WP(C).No. 4399 of 2014 (Y)
---------------------------
PETITIONER:
-----------
M/S. PUNALUR PAPER MILLS LIMITED
PUNALUR-691332, KOLLAM DISTRICT, KERALA
REPRESENTED BY ITS DIRECTOR, MR.NELSON SEBASTIAN.
BY ADVS.SRI.JOSEPH KODIANTHARA (SR.)
SRI.V.ABRAHAM MARKOS
SRI.BINU MATHEW
SRI.TOM THOMAS (KAKKUZHIYIL)
SRI.ABRAHAM JOSEPH MARKOS
SRI.ABRAHAM VARGHESE THARAKAN
RESPONDENTS:
-----------
1. COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE AND CUSTOMS
CENTRAL REVENUE BUILDING, I.S.PRESS ROAD
COCHIN-682018.
2. THE CUSTOMS
EXCISE AND SERVICE TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
SOUTH ZONAL BENCH, SHASTRI BHAVAN, 26
HADDOWS ROAD, CHENNAI-600 006.
R1 BY ADV. SRI.THOMAS MATHEW NELLIMOOTTIL,SC,CB EX
BY ADV. SRI. JOSEPH KODIANTHARA, SC
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
13-02-2014, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WP(C).No. 4399 of 2014 (Y)
---------------------------
APPENDIX
PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS
-----------------------
EXHIBIT P1 COLLECTIVELY : TRUE COPY OF THE PAPER BOOK IN THE MAIN
APPEAL NO............ FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE CUSTOMS,
EXCISE AND SERVICE TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL (CESTAT), CHENNAI.
EXHIBIT P2 : TRUE COPY OF THE STAY ORDER NO.124/1993 DT.20-4-1993
PASSED BY R2 TRIBUNAL.
EXHIBIT P3 : TRUE COPY OF THE FINAL ORDER NOS.2226 TO 2228/1996 DT.4-
11-1996 PASSED BY R2 TRIBUNAL.
EXHIBIT P4 : TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DT.24-9-2002 PASSED BY THIS
HON'BLE COURT IN WA 790/1997.
EXHIBIT P5 : TRUE COPY OF THE MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING EXECUTED ON
2-5-2002 BETWEEN THE PETITIONER AND THE STATE OF KERALA.
EXHIBIT P6 : TRUE COPY OF THE SHARE PURCHASE AGREEMENT EXECUTED ON
14-5-2010 BY THE PROMOTERS OF THE PETITIONER COMPANY.
EXHIBIT P7 : TRUE COPY OF THE MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING EXECUTED ON
27-2-2011 BETWEEN THE PETITIONER AND THE STATE OF KERALA.
EXHIBIT P8 : TRUE COPY OF THE CHALAN DT.28-3-2012 EVIDENCING PRE-
DEPOSIT OF RS.7,00,000/-
EXHIBIT P9 : TRUE COPY OF THE RESTORATION APPLICATION
NO.E/ROA/17/2012 DT.3-4-2012 FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE R2
TRIBUNAL IN APPEAL NO.E/SB/1396/1992.
EXHIBIT P10 : TRUE COPY OF THE DECISION REPORTED IN THE CASE OF
COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS VS.LINDT EXPORTS IN 2012(278) E.L.T. 587
(DEL.)
EXHIBIT P11 : TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION FOR ADJOURNMENT DT.5-7-
2013 FILED BY THE PETITIONER'S COUNSEL BEFORE R2 TRIBUNAL.
EXHIBIT P12 : TRUE COPY OF THE MISC.ORDER NO.42784/2013 DT.28-11-2013
DISMISSING THE RESTORATION APPLICATION PASSED BY R2 TRIBUNAL.
EXHIBIT P13 : TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER-IN-ORIGINAL NO.1/2009 (DENOVO)
COMMR. DT.16-3-2009 PASSED BY THE COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE AND
CUSTOMS, TRIVANDRUM.
EXHIBIT P14 : TRUE COPY OF THE CALCULATION CHART FILED BY THE
PETITIONER BEFORE THE COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE AND CUSTOMS,
TRIVANDRUM.
RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS: NIL
-----------------------
TRUE COPY
PA TO JUDGE
SCL.
P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, J.
========================
W.P.(C). No. 4399 of 2014
--------------------------------------------
Dated this the 13th day of February, 2014
JUDGMENT
The petitioner has approached this Court with the following prayers:
"i. Call for the records relating to Ext.P12 order and quash the same by issue of a writ of certiorari or such other appropriate writ, direction or order.
ii. Issue a writ of mandamus or such other appropriate writ, direction or order allowing Ext.P9 Restoration Application and direct the 2nd respondent Tribunal to consider and decide on merits the petitioner's Ext.P1 appeal No. E/SB/1396/1992 along with connected Appeal Nos. E/SB/1397/1992 and E/SB/1398/1992."
2. Heard the learned Standing Counsel for the respondents as well.
3. During the course of hearing, it is brought to the notice of this Court that the law has already been declared by a Division Bench of Madras High Court exactly on similar circumstance as per the decision in Metal Weld Electrodes v. CESTAT, Chennai (2014 (299) E.L.T. 3 (Mad.), that statutory remedy by way of W.P.C. No. 4399 of 2014 -2- appeal is maintainable. It is stated by the learned Standing Counsel that, similar decision has been taken by this Court as well.
3. The learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner submits that, in the light of the law as aforesaid, the petitioner may be permitted to pursue the statutory remedy by way of appeal.
Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed, without prejudice to the right of the petitioner to pursue the statutory remedy by way of appeal in accordance with law.
P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, JUDGE.
kp/-