Madras High Court
Tirupur Sri Senthil Cotton Mills ... vs The Commissioner Of Central Excise ... on 21 January, 2019
Author: S.M.Subramaniam
Bench: S.M.Subramaniam
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 21.01.2019
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE Mr. JUSTICE S.M.SUBRAMANIAM
W.P.Nos.36642 to 36646 of 2006
and W.P.M.P.Nos. 36643 to 36646 of 2006
Tirupur Sri Senthil Cotton Mills Limited,
Rep by its Chairman & Managing Director,
Shri.A.P. Velusami
S.F. No.302. Andipalayam,
Mangalam Road, Tirupur 641 687. ..Petitioners in all writ petitions
Vs
1. The Commissioner of Central Excise (Appeals),
6/7, ATD Street, Race Course Road,
Coimbatore – 641 018.
2. The Additional Commissioner of Central Excise,
6/7, ATD Street, Race Course Road,
Coimbatore – 641 018.
3. The Deputy Commissioner of Central Excise,
Tirupur Division, Kumaran Shopping Complex,
1st Floor, Tirupur – 641 601. ..Respondents in all writ petitions
PRAYER in W.P.No.36642 of 2006: Writ Petitions filed under Article
226 of the Constitution of India, to issue Writs of Mandamus, for
directing the officers of the respondents and their counter parts
operating within the territory of India to conduct the investigation and
ascertain the identity of manufacturer who manufactured the yarn
supplied by M/s.Raj Traders, Surat to the petitioner and to recover the
excise duty evaded jointly and severally from the identified
manufacturer and the registered dealer namely M/s.Raj Traders, Surat.
http://www.judis.nic.in
2
PRAYER in W.P.No.36643 of 2006 : Writ Petitions filed under Article
226 of the Constitution of India, to issue Writ of Certiorarified
Mandamus, to call for the records of the impugned common
Miscellaneous Order-In-Appeal No.2/2006-Cx. Dated 27.06.2006 of the
1st respondent herein and quash the same and to direct the 1st
respondent to dispose the respective Appeal Nos.53/2006-Cx. and
54/2006-Cx. on merits without insisting on pre-deposit of duty and
penalty and pass such further or other orders as this Court may deem
fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case.
PRAYER in W.P.No.36644 of 2006: Writ Petitions filed under Article
226 of the Constitution of India, to issue Writs of Certiorari, to call for
the records of the impugned common Order-In-Appeal Nos.83 &
84/2006-Cx. Dated 01.08.2006of the 1st respondent herein quash the
same and pass such further or other orders as this Court may deem fit
and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case.
PRAYER in W.P.No.36645 of 2006: Writ Petitions filed under Article
226 of the Constitution of India, to issue Writs of Certiorari, to call for
the records of the impugned common Order-In-Appeal Nos.83 &
84/2006-Cx. Dated 01.08.2006 of the 1st respondent herein quash the
same and pass such further or other orders as this Court may deem fit
and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case.
PRAYER in W.P.No.36646 of 2006: Writ Petitions filed under Article
226 of the Constitution of India, to issue Writs of Certiorarified
Mandamus, to call for the records of the impugned common Order-In-
Appeal No.2/2006-Cx. Dated 27.06.2006 of the 1st respondent herein
quash the same and to direct the 1st respondent to dis[pose the
respective Appeal Nos. 53/2006-Cx. And 54/2006-Cx. On merits
without insisting on pre-deposit of duty and penalty and pass such
http://www.judis.nic.in
3
further or other orders as this Court may deem fit and proper in the
facts and circumstances of the case.
For Petitioners : Mr.Nidhin Jayachandar
( in all writ petitions )
For Respondent : Mr.T.R.Senthilkumar
( in all writ petitions )
COMMON ORDER
These writ petitions are filed questioning the actions of the Commissioner of Central Exercise on the ground that the Commissioner had felt to investigate and ascertain the identity of manufacturer, who manufacture the yarn supplied by M/s.Raj Traders at Surat.
2. The grievances of the writ petitioner is that the exercise duty had been unnecessarily imposed on the writ petitioner without conducting proper investigation by the authorities competent. The learned counsel for the writ petitioner also reiterated that no notice was issued to the M/s.Raj Traders, who supplied yarn for manufacturing of the goods and the Commissioner had failed to conduct any investigation in this regard to ascertain the genuinity and the identity of the supplier of yarn to the writ petitioner.
3. This Court is of an opinion that all these complex facts and circumstances are to be placed before the competent authorities for the http://www.judis.nic.in 4 purpose of adjudication. This Court in a Writ Jurisdiction cannot appreciate the facts and circumstances as well as the disputed facts by Verifying the original records under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. A person, who is claiming rebate or any benefit under the provisions of the Central Exercise Act or under the Government of India orders is bound to establish his case before the competent authority for availing of all such benefits or rebates as applicable. Contrarily, a Writ proceedings cannot be entertained and all those disputed issues cannot be adjudicated in the present writ petition.
4. This Court is of an undoubted opinion that the writ petitioner has raised certain issues, which all are to be verified through the original files and the materials available on record. The Genuinity of the Traders, Supply of yarn to the writ petitioner and goods manufactured and supplied, which all are to be verified through the original records and by conducting inspection or investigation in the manner known to law. The Commissioner or the competent authority, who is empowered to proceed with all such issues must conduct an enquiry as prescribed and by affording reasonable opportunity to all the persons concerned.
5. This being the principles to be followed, this Court is of an opinion that the writ petitioner is at liberty to submit his explanations/objections and the documents, if any, to the original http://www.judis.nic.in 5 Authority Competent, who in turn shall adjudicate the matter on merits and in accordance with law and by affording reasonable opportunity to all the parties concerned, take a decision and accordingly, proceed with the matter in the manner known to law.
6. With these observations, all the writ petitions stand disposed of. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.
21.01.2019
kak/kmm
Index : Yes
Internet : Yes
Speaking Order
To
1. The Commissioner of Central Excise (Appeals), 6/7, ATD Street, Race Course Road, Coimbatore – 641 018.
2. The Additional Commissioner of Central Excise, 6/7, ATD Street, Race Course Road, Coimbatore – 641 018.
3. The Deputy Commissioner of Central Excise, Tirupur Division, Kumaran Shopping Complex, 1st Floor, Tirupur – 641 601.
http://www.judis.nic.in 6 S.M.SUBRAMANIAM, J.
kmm W.P.Nos.36642 to 36646 of 2006 21.01.2019 http://www.judis.nic.in