TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2021 (3) TMI 184
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ilable under the provisions of the Customs Act before the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal ('the Tribunal' for brevity). 2. The writ petition was filed challenging the Order-in-Original No.132/2016 dated 22.02.2016, in and by which, the respondent herein denied the exemption benefit claimed by the appellants by availing the benefit of Customs Notification No.85/2004-Cus dated 31.08.2004 read with Notification No.101/2004-Cus(NT) dated 31.08.2004 in respect of 6 bills of entry for the imports made by the first appellant; ordered for demand of differential duty of Rs. 20,85,317/- and for recovery in terms of the proviso to Section 28(1)/Section 28(4) of the Act; ordered for recovery of interest under Section 28AA/Se....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Show Cause Notice dated 06.06.2015. 4. Mr.A.P.Srinivas, learned Senior Standing Counsel appearing for the respondent seeks to sustain the order passed in the writ petition, by contending that the appellants have an efficient alternate remedy by way of an appeal before the Commissioner of Appeals, which has been clearly mentioned in the order passed by the Joint Commissioner and there is no justification for the appellants to bypass the appeal remedy. 5. First, we take up for consideration the observations made by the learned Writ Court for dismissing the writ petition. The learned Writ Court, by placing reliance on the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Assistant Collector of Central Excise Vs. Dunlop India limited ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... tasked with being the final recourse to upholding the rule of law within its territorial jurisdiction, it must necessarily have the power to examine any case before it and make a determination of whether or not its writ jurisdiction is engaged. Judicial review under Article 226 is an intrinsic feature of the basic structure of the Constitution. 14. These principles are set out in the decisions of this Court in numerous cases and we need only mention a few to demonstrate the consistent manner in which they have been re-iterated. In State of Uttar Pradesh v Indian Hume Pipe Co. Limited,10 this Court observed that the High Court's decision to exercise its writ jurisdiction is essentially discretionary: "4...It is always a matter of discre....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ecided as speedily as may be." (Emphasis supplied) The intention behind this self-imposed rule is clear. If High Courts were to exercise their writ jurisdiction so widely as to regularly override statutory appellate procedures, they would themselves become inundated with a vast number of cases to the detriment of the litigants in those cases. This would also defeat the legislature's intention in enacting statutory appeal mechanisms to ensure the speedy disposal of cases. 16. The observation extracted above raises an important consideration with respect to the present case. If, by the self-imposed rule, the writ jurisdiction of High Courts is circumscribed by the existence of a suitable alternate remedy, whether constitutional, statuto....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....and decisions of inferior courts subordinate to it and ordinarily the superior court will decline to interfere until the aggrieved party has exhausted his other statutory remedies, if any. But this rule requiring the exhaustion of statutory remedies before the writ will be granted is a rule of policy, convenience and discretion rather than a rule of law and instances are numerous where a writ of certiorari has been issued in spite of the fact that the aggrieved party had other adequate legal remedies." 21. The mere existence of alternate forums where the aggrieved party may secure relief does not create a legal bar on a High Court to exercise its writ jurisdiction. It is a factor to be taken into consideration by the High Court amongst ....