Appeals restored and allowed under Article 142 despite earlier non-maintainability finding under Section 35-G for clandestine manufacturing

SC held the appeal was maintainable, invoking Article 142 to set aside the HC order that had declared the appeals not maintainable under Section 35-G in respect of clandestine manufacturing and removal of goods. The SC restored the appeals to their original file numbers in the HC for adjudication according to law and disposed of the appeals.

---

---

These appeals under Section 35-L of the Central Excise Act, 1944 challenge a CESTAT order dated 25.02.2011. The High Court had earlier dismissed CEA Nos. 34-37/2011 and 13/2012 as not maintainable under Section 35-G, treating the issues as ones fit for appeal to the Supreme Court under Section 35-L; that High Court order was upheld on dismissal of SLP. The appellant relied on Commissioner of Central Excise, Bhavnagar v. Fact Paper Mills (2015) 13 SCC 614, wherein this Court held that appeals under Section 35-L "would not be maintainable if the issues raised are of clandestine removal of manufactured goods and clandestine manufacturing of goods." The present appeal involves that very issue. Invoking Article 142, the Court set aside the High Court's 04.09.2014 order and restored the CEA appeals to their original numbers for decision "in accordance with law," keeping all contentions open. Pending applications disposed.

---