Patna High Court - Orders
Cachar Supari Centre And Anr vs The Union Of India And Ors on 25 April, 2024
Bench: Chief Justice, Harish Kumar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.4165 of 2015
======================================================
Cachar Supari Centre and Anr.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The Union Of India and Ors.
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Prabhat Ranjan, Advocate
Mr. Chandan Kumar, Advocate
Mr. Ansh Prasad, Advocate
For the Respondent/s : Dr. K.N. Singh, ASG
Mr. Anshuman Singh, Sr. SC, Custom
Mr. Shivaditya Dhari Sinha, AC to ASG
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE
and
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HARISH KUMAR
ORAL ORDER
(Per: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE)
28 25-04-2024The question raised in the order dated 22.04.2024 is as to whether the matter should be placed before a Division Bench or the Single Bench.
2.The confiscation of goods challenged in the writ petition, is on the ground that it was illegally imported/smuggled. The order of the Commissioner which is impugned in the writ petition, confiscating the goods on the ground that it is illegally imported, is a direct consequence of an allegation of failure to make payment of customs duty.
3. The question that arise now is as to whether the appeal would lie before a Division Bench or a Single Bench.
4. The learned Counsel for the petitioner would point Patna High Court CWJC No.4165 of 2015(28) dt.25-04-2024 2/3 out that as per the item classification of the High Court, item no. 19 is 'Customs (excluding tax)' which is to be placed before the learned Single Judge. It is also pointed out that as per the Customs Act, an appealable order has to be first taken up before the First Appellate Authority and then the Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) and thereafter an appeal before the Division Bench of the High Court.
5.The argument seems to be that when the Division Bench is hearing the statutory appeal, a Division Bench should not be hearing a writ petition filed before the High Court.
6. We are unable to accept the argument, especially since even if the Division Bench is hearing a statutory appeal, the learned Single Judge of the High Court though not an hierarchical appellate authority, is always superior to the Tribunal exercising jurisdiction under the statute. There is hence no bar in the Division Bench hearing an appeal because the High Court is always a Division Bench and the roster for a Single Judge is only for convenience; from whose judgment an intra-court appeal lies to the Division Bench. Essentially, the jurisdiction of the Single Judge and the Division Bench should ideally concede to the rules framed by the High Court.
7. We notice that the powers of Benches as per the Patna High Court CWJC No.4165 of 2015(28) dt.25-04-2024 3/3 Rules of the High Court at Patna, 1916 in Chapter 2 by Rule 2(g) specifies all 'direct and indirect taxable applications and appeals or references' to be placed before the Division Bench. Hence, as per the Rules of the High Court any matter where tax is involved, it should be heard by the Division Bench if it is a writ application under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.
8. 'Tax', whether it be direct or indirect, is a compulsory extraction of money imposed by the State on the citizen as distinguished from 'fees', which are characterized by an element of quid pro quo; absent in 'tax'. Hence, as per the Rules of the High Court, tax matters under Article 226 of the Constitution of India have to go before the Division Bench and it does not depend upon the roster-items specified by the Registry for administrative convenience. Item no. 19 with respect to Customs (excluding tax) shall henceforth be shown as a matter before the Division Bench.
9. Post this matter on 25.06.2024.
(K. Vinod Chandran, CJ) (Harish Kumar, J) supratim/-
U