TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
1982 (7) TMI 92
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... as "G.P.I. Form". He has been paying duty ever since it was imposed on aerated waters and other beverages i.e., since 1970. Among the various entries to be made in the G.P.I. Form, it is the case of the petitioner, that one such entry requires the assessee to note down the time of removal of the goods from the Factory. It is further case of the petitioner that the Company was advised that the time of removal to be noted by them in the gate-pass was the time at which the goods were removed out of the constructed factory premises and loaded on the trucks and that "it was not obligatory to remove the goods out of the factory premises at the time noted in accordance with the advice mentioned in previous item" and that in addition thereto, the ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... in accordance with the provisions of Rule 173C of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 hereinafter called "the Rules", the Petitioner-Company has been submitting from time to time price lists for approval by the proper officer i.e. the Assistant Collector of Central Excise. The Central Government has been instructing the Central Excise authorities to dispose of the applications for approval of the price lists within fifteen days from the date of receipt of the price lists. The petitioner submitted two such lists as early as on 18-1-1982 to the Assistant Collector, but he did not pass any orders thereon prior to 5-7-1982. The Assistant Collector neither called for any information nor gave any notice of hearing to the. petitioner; nor did he retur....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ce lists ordered by the Assistant Collector as illegal and without jurisdiction and that the seizure of the trucks together with the goods therein effected on 18-7-1982 is illegal, arbitrary and without jurisdiction and for a declaration that the Petitioner-Company is entitled to seek quantitative discounts in the price lists submitted by it. We have heard the petitioner at length and we are not persuaded to hold that this court should exercise its extraordinary jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India in a matter such as this. So far as revision of the price lists is concerned, under Rule 173C of the Rules the assessee is required to file the price list of the goods assessable. The price list on the basis of which the va....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....istinct cause of action for him and actually a separate writ petition ought to have been filed in respect of this grievance of the petitioner and ought not to have been clubbed with the prayer for quashing the revised price list. We will now deal with the second prayer in the writ petition. The two orders of the Central Excise Authorities are in no way interlinked. Only the petitioner seeks to link them by making an allegation that since the petitioner did not agree to pay the duty in accordance with the revised price lists, the Central Excise authorities proceeded to seize the goods. Even though such removal of the goods may be in accordance with the earlier instructions of the respondents and well-established practice, the said practice w....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....he legality or propriety of the seizure effected on 18-7-1982. We have no doubt that those authorities, when a proper appeal or revision is presented to them as provided under the statute, would consider these matters and pass appropriate orders. The petitioner has rushed to this court alleging that although he has made some representation in this behalf to the Excise Collector, the Central Board of Excise and Customs and the Central Government, they have not taken any action. A mere representation is not a substitute for appeal or revision. It does not amount to exhausting the alternative remedy provided under the statute. Evidently, the authorities concerned did not choose to act on the representation because the aggrieved party has a spe....