High Court upholds validity of challenged interlocutory orders under Central Excise Act Section 32-I

The High Court upheld the validity of the interlocutory orders challenged by the petitioner under Section 32-I of the Central Excise Act, finding them not illegal or lacking jurisdiction. The Court clarified that the second respondent had not prejudged the issue but had merely exercised powers to request information. The petitioner was allowed to challenge the final decision of the second respondent in the future, but no interference was deemed necessary at the current stage.

---

---

Issues involved: Challenge to interlocutory orders u/s 32-I of Central Excise Act by petitioner.

The petitioner challenged interlocutory orders dated 7-8-2012 and 20-11-2012 passed by the second respondent, alleging pre-judgment in favor of the first respondent without proper adjudication by revenue authorities. The High Court found the petitioner's submission misconceived, stating that the second respondent had not decided the issue but had only exercised powers u/s 32-I to request preparation of tabulated chart of alleged bogus invoices and duty credit details. The Court held that the orders were not illegal or without jurisdiction, given the powers conferred by the Central Excise Act.

The High Court concluded that the impugned interlocutory orders were valid under Section 32-I of the Central Excise Act, and no interference was warranted at that stage. However, the petitioner was granted the right to challenge the final decision of the second respondent on all available grounds in accordance with the law after it is made.

---