TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2022 (5) TMI 589
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ry objection that the petitioner has alternate remedy and can file an Appeal. 4. The learned Senior Advocate Mr. Shroff for the petitioner strenuously contends that the availability of alternate remedy is not a bar for this court to invoke its writ jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. The learned counsel relies upon the judgment of the Apex Court in the case of Whirlpool Corporation vs. Registrar of Trade Marks, Mumbai and Others (1998) 8 SCC 1 and submits that the High Court can exercise its powers under Article 226 of the Constitution of India in spite of the alternative statutory remedies, specially in a case where the authority against whom the Writ is filed is shown to have had no jurisdiction or had purporte....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... c. T.C. Basappa vs. T. Nagappa and Another AIR 1954 SC 440. d. Parry and Co. Ltd. vs. P.C. Pal, Judge of the Second Industrial Tribunal, Calcutta and Others AIR 1970 SC 1334. 6. The learned Senior Advocate submits that the Board Circulars are binding on the Revenue. In the present matter, the authorities have failed to adhere to the procedure and the circulars. The import pricing methodology adopted by the petitioner was thoroughly investigated by the SVB and the IR was issued recommending acceptance of the declared values. The past as well as the current imports made by the petitioner followed the same pricing methodology. The respondents erred in law to doubt the declared values relying on past imports made by the petitioner ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... laid down in the circular. The authorities have failed to adhere to the same. The matter ought to have been referred to the jurisdictional Commissioner in terms of para 5.1 to 5.4 of the circular. The orders are issued de-hors the procedure prescribed in the circular and IR issued by SVB. The same is wholly without jurisdiction. The First Appellate Authority, in its operative part of the order directed the SVB to correct the evaluation. In fact, the matter ought to have been remanded to SVB. 9. The learned Senior Advocate further submits that the petition if it is relegated to the remedy of appeal, would face unnecessary hardship. The petitioner will be required to file 111 and 88 Appeals which will take long time to decide and the peti....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....021 passed in Civil Appeal No.5121 of 2021 11. We have considered the submission manifested by the learned counsel for the authorities. 12. It is accepted by the petitioner that the Appeal is provided Against the impugned Order passed by the Commissioner of Customs (Appeals). Availability of alternative remedy is certainly not an anathema for this court to exercise its writ jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. The rule of alternate remedy is a rule of self-restraint. If substantive remedy of Appeal is available, the court would be slow to exercise its writ jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. The Apex Court has held that Writ petition can be entertained in in exceptional circumstances wh....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....Custom (Appeals). The Commissioner of Custom (Appeals) confirmed the order of assessment by dismissing the Appeal. The petitioner has remedy of Second Appeal. Once the petitioner has availed the remedy of appeal, it would be in appropriate to entertain the Writ Petition more particularly when further remedy of Appeal is available. There is no impediment for the petitioner to avail the remedy of Appeal. Only because the petitioners will have to file 111 and 88 Appeals would be no ground to invoke Writ Jurisdiction of this court. 16. In the light of the above, we are not inclined to entertain the Writ Petitions. 17. Both the Writ Petitions are disposed of with liberty to the petitioner to avail alternate remedy, as is permissible in law....