TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2010 (3) TMI 310
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....the said order and notification and from collecting anti dumping duty levied in terms of the said notification dated 8th October, 2009. 2. The petitioners have also prayed for interim relief in terms of the final prayer. In other words, the final prayer and the interim prayer both are identical. In addition to the challenge to the final findings and the notification referred to above, the petitioners have also challenged the Customs Tariff (Identification, Assessment and Collection of Anti-dumping Duty on Dumped Articles and Determination of Injury) Rules, 1995 (Rules) contending that they are ultravires to Article 14 of the Constitution of India. 3. The above petition was heard on admission. Submissions 4. Mr. Abhichandani, learned Senior Counsel appearing for respondent No. 3 raised a preliminary objection to the maintainability of the petition con tending that alternate remedy under Section 9-C of the Customs Tariff Act, 1975 (as amended) is available to the petitioners against the final notification imposing anti-dumping duty as also to challenge the validity of the Rules as such, this writ petition should not be entertained in exercise of powers under Article 226 o....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nted it would be open to the Senior Vice President to discharge the functions of the President. We are told that Benches have already been constituted for hearing appeals. 9Since the Tribunal is already in seizin of the appeal filed by the appellant from the final findings on the new shipper review as well as the subsequent notifications, no purpose will be served in keeping this appeal alive which only related to an interim stage of the new shipper review, It would in the circumstances be appropriate to allow the appellants to pursue the appeal before the Appellate Tribunal. 10In the circumstances this appeal is disposed of by granting leave to the appellants to urge all the contentions raised in this appeal in the pending appeal before the CESTAT. CESTAT shall decide the matter without being influenced by the High Court s judgment dated 2-12-2003. CESTAT shall decide the matter as expeditiously as in conveniently possible and preferably by 31st May, 2005. (Emphasis supplied) 7. Mr. Abbichandani has relied upon one more unreported judgment of the Delhi High Court in the case of Kundan Rice Mills Ltd. v. Union of India and Another, in WP(C) No. 6747 of 2007, dated 11th ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... and rules. All decisions of these Tribunals will, however, be subject to scrutiny before a Division Bench of the High Court within whose jurisdiction the Tribunals concerned falls. With the aforesaid submission Mr. Abhichandani also tried to justify the rules and reasonableness thereof. 10. Mr. Abhichandani also urged that the petition involves various questions of facts in the light of the principles for determination of margin of dumping, export price, normal value and for determination of injury as provided in Annexures-I and II. He further went on to demonstrate that sufficient opportunity was given at various stages to the petitioners to express its views. As such, this is not a fit case for consideration in the writ jurisdiction of this Court. 11. In reply, Mr. Sridharan, learned Counsel for the petitioners urged that so far as the validity of Rules is concerned, the Appellate Tribunal has no jurisdiction to consider the validity thereof. According to him, Article 323-B only specifies the Parliament s powers to make law for entrusting mailers to the Tribunal which is created under the law i.e. under Section 129 of the Customs Act with other statutory provisions made....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....6. Article 323B(1) enables the Parliament to provide, by legislation, for the adjudication by Tribunals, of the matters specified in clause (2) including levy, assessment, collection and enforcement of any tax under sub-clause (a) thereof. Such laws made under clause (1) may provide for the establishment of hierarchy of Tribunals, specify their powers and procedures under clause (3) of Article 323B. Thus, Article 323B only specifies the Parliaments power to make law for entrusting matters to the Tribunal created or to be created under the law, which is evident from the observations of the Supreme Court made in paragraph 81 in the case of L. Chandrakumar v. Union of India and Others reported in 1997(92) E.L.T. 318 (S.C.) = (1997)3 Supreme Court Cases 261 reading as under: 81 … there is no reason why the power to the validity of legislations against the provisions of the Constitution cannot be conferred upon Administrative Tribunals created under the Act or upon Tribunals created under Article 323-B of the Constitution. 17. Both Articles 323A and 323B contemplated that such Tribunals may be established under a statute which provide for such establishment and did not create th....