2019 (7) TMI 204

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... 32121, 32124, 32137, 32138, 32147, 32148, 32151, 32154, 32161 and 32164 of 2018. ORDER Mr. S. R. Sundar, learned standing counsel takes notice for the respondents. By consent of the parties, these main writ petitions are taken up for final disposal at the admission stage itself. 2. These writ petitions are filed challenging the common Order-in-Original Nos. 31 to 40 of 2016, dated February 29, 2016 passed by the first respondent. 3. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned standing counsel for the respondents and perused the materials placed before this court in these writ petitions. 4. On a careful perusal of the facts and circumstances, this court is not inclined to entertain these writ petitions for th....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....g appropriate proceedings. Admittedly, the petitioner did not choose to do so. On the other hand, the petitioner seeks to invoke the jurisdiction of this court under article 226 of the Constitution of India to consider the correctness or otherwise of the common order passed by the adjudicating authority dated February 29, 2016. 5. No doubt, the learned counsel for the petitioner sought to rely upon two Full Bench decisions of the High Court, Hyderabad . . . reported in [2018] TIOL-484-HC-AP-CX-LB and the High Court, Gujarat reported in Panoli Intermediate (India) Pvt. Ltd. v. Union of India [2015] 326 ELT 532 (Guj) and contend that these writ petitions can be entertained even in the above said circumstances. 6. I have perused the abov....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....llenging the order passed by the original adjudicating authority in following circumstances that- (A.1) The authority has passed the order without jurisdiction and by assuming jurisdiction which there exist none, or (A.2) Has exercised the power in excess of the jurisdiction and by overstepping or crossing the limits of jurisdiction, or (A.3) Has acted in flagrant disregard to law or rules or procedure or acted in violation of principles of natural justice where no procedure is specified." 7. Agreeing with the above view expressed by the Gujarat High Court, the Andhra Pradesh High Court in Electronic Corporation of India Limited case [2019] 7 GSTR-OL 48 (T&AP) . . . has observed at paragraphs 18, 21 and 22 as f....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....arameters have already been indicated by the Full Bench of the Gujarat High Court in Panoli Intermediate (India) Pvt. Ltd. [2015] 326 ELT 532 (Guj) to the effect that this court would be guided by the nature of the challenge, viz., that the authority had passed an order without jurisdiction or by assuming jurisdiction when there exists none or has exercised power in excess of jurisdiction or overstepping the limits of such jurisdiction or has acted in blatant disregard of the law or rules of procedure or in violation of the principles of natural justice where no such procedure is specified. 22. Ultimately, what would weigh with this court is whether gross injustice would result from non-consideration of the challenge sought to be l....