2025 (10) TMI 1262 - HC - Central Excise

Writ petition converted to Civil Miscellaneous Appeal; petitioner to refile affidavit as Memorandum of Appeal under Section 35G

HC declined to entertain the Article 226 writ and held the petitioner's grievance is more appropriately redressed by a Division Bench by way of a Civil ... Invocation of jurisdiction of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India - failure to follow the decision of the Karnataka High Court in Union of India Vs. Slovak India Trading Company Private Limited [2006 (7) TMI 9 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT] - HELD THAT:- This Court is of the view, the Petitioner's grievance can be redressed better by the Division Bench of this Court by way of Civil Miscellaneous Appeal. This Writ Petition is directed to be renumbered as Civil Miscellaneous Appeal - The Petitioner is therefore directed to take the papers back and represent the affidavit by substituting it with a Memorandum of Appeal under Section 35(G) of the Central Excise Act, 1944. Petition closed. Petitioner challenged the Order in Excise Appeal No.42207 of 2017 (FO/A/40498/2025-EX[DB]) dated 06.05.2025 of the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT), Chennai, contending the CESTAT 'failed to follow' the Karnataka High Court decision in Union of India v. Slovak India Trading Co. Pvt. Ltd., 2006 (201) E.L.T. 559 (Kar.), and the Full Bench CESTAT, Mumbai decision in M/s. ATV Projects India Ltd. v. Commissioner, Final Order No. A/86340/2023 dated 06.09.2023, rendering the impugned order 'arbitrary and therefore amenable to the jurisdiction of this Court under Article 226.' Court held the grievance is better redressed by a Division Bench via Civil Miscellaneous Appeal, directed the writ petition to be renumbered as a Civil Miscellaneous Appeal, and ordered the petitioner to withdraw the papers and file a Memorandum of Appeal under Section 35G of the Central Excise Act, 1944. No costs.