Court dismisses Writ Petition, emphasizes need to exhaust remedies & follow statutory requirements

The court dismissed the Writ Petition challenging the order-in-original dated 04.12.2020, emphasizing the petitioner's failure to appear as directed and pursue alternate remedies. The Division Bench's dismissal of the Writ Appeal on 01.02.2021 led the court to reject intervention under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. The petitioner was granted the option to file an appeal against the impugned order within eight weeks, subject to statutory conditions, without any limitation on the respondents' acceptance. The judgment underscores the necessity of exhausting alternate remedies and adhering to statutory requirements in legal matters.

---

---

Issues:
Challenge to order-in-original dated 04.12.2020 after previous challenge to order-in-original dated 30.04.2012. Compliance with time-bound exercise set by the learned single Judge. Request for keeping the matter in abeyance due to filing of Writ Appeal. Dismissal of Writ Appeal by Division Bench. Justification for intervention under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.

The judgment deals with a challenge to an order-in-original dated 04.12.2020, following a previous challenge to an order-in-original dated 30.04.2012. The petitioner had approached the court earlier, and the learned single Judge had set aside the penalty originally imposed under Section 11AC of the Central Excise Act, granting liberty to the Commissioner of Central Excise to issue a fresh show cause notice for the imposition of penalty after giving an opportunity to the petitioner. The time-bound exercise was to be completed within 12 weeks from the date of the order.

Subsequently, a show cause notice for the imposition of penalty was issued on 18.11.2020, calling for a reply within one week and fixing a personal hearing on 30.11.2020. The petitioner requested to keep the matter in abeyance due to filing a Writ Appeal, but the Commissioner decided to proceed with the matter as directed by the court. The petitioner did not appear on the scheduled date, leading to the passing of the impugned order based on the earlier court direction.

The court found that there was no justification for intervention under Article 226 of the Constitution of India in this matter. The petitioner had been provided with due opportunity before the impugned order was passed. Despite the opportunity, the petitioner chose to pursue the Writ Appeal, which was later dismissed by the Division Bench on 01.02.2021. Consequently, the court held that the petitioner could resort to alternate remedies by filing an appeal challenging the impugned order within eight weeks, which would be accepted by the respondents without limitation but subject to compliance with all other statutory conditions.

In conclusion, the Writ Petition challenging the order-in-original was dismissed, and the connected Miscellaneous Petition was closed without any costs being awarded. The judgment highlights the importance of exhausting alternate remedies and complying with statutory conditions in legal proceedings.

---