2015 (10) TMI 677 - HC - Central Excise

Review petition dismissed for impermissible re-argument, emphasizing adherence to procedural scope.

The court dismissed the review petition as the grounds raised were deemed unsustainable, constituting an impermissible attempt to re-argue the case. ... Review petition - Held that:- Review petitioner by presentation of this review petition seeks an opportunity to argue the entire case afresh on merits under the garb of the review petition, which is not permissible and tenable in law. In fact, the order dated 19-3-2014, which is sought to be reviewed herein, has been passed by this Court in Tax Case No. 6 of 2014 in presence of both the counsel - under the garb of review petition, the petitioner should not be permitted to argue the entire case afresh, which would amount to convert the review petition into an appeal and the same is not sustainable in law. - Decided against assessee. Issues: Review of Tribunal's order, scope of review petitionIn this case, the review petitioner sought a review of the order passed by the Tribunal, requesting the matter to be remitted back for a fresh decision without prejudice from earlier observations. The grounds raised by the petitioner were deemed unsustainable as they were an attempt to re-argue the case, not permissible under the law. The court emphasized that review proceedings are not akin to appeals and must adhere strictly to the scope outlined in the Code of Civil Procedure. The petitioner's attempt to argue the entire case afresh under the guise of a review petition was rejected, citing precedents to support this position. The court highlighted that allowing such a practice would essentially convert the review petition into an appeal, which is not permissible. Ultimately, the review petition was dismissed for lacking a valid basis.