TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
1976 (7) TMI 72
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....mentioned appeal. 2.This appeal had come up before me a few months ago and I had fully heard it, but could not deliver the judgment and as the matter was old, I directed that the matter may be placed before the single Judge who was dealing with the Second Appeal. However, the said matter could not be taken up and it is again notified on my Board when I am sitting as single Judge to deal with Second Appeals. Though the matter is on Board for about a fortnight, the learned Advocate Mr. A. F. Patel for the appellant has not so far appeared. In these circumstances, I proceed to deliver the judgment, because the matter was fully heard by me on earlier occasion. 3. The plaintiff-appellant's case before the trial court was that he was a cult....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....he Central Excise Department. Ultimately the Mamlatdar, the competent authority, had held, the defendant No. 6 to be a trespasser and impostor. The result was that the goods seized by the Police under the panchnama dated 26th February, 1960 were ordered to be delivered to the plaintiff and on or about 25th August, 1960, the goods were delivered to the plaintiff. At the time of delivery, the assessment was made and the plaintiff had paid the requisite duty and the goods had been delivered to him. However, therefore at the instigation of the defendant No. 2, the department had issued a demand notice to the plaintiff and asked him to pay additional duty on the tobacco weighing 1208 pounds alleging that on the earlier occasion the plaintiff had....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....intiff's allegation that he had paid duty on tobacco grown on the entire field was disputed and it was alleged by way of defence that the plaintiff had paid duty only on a moiety of land. The plaintiff's allegations that the principles of natural justice were violated and he was not afforded a reasonable opportunity to take part in the inquiry before the Assistant Collector also denied. The learned trial Judge upheld the contentions of the defendant, the Union of India, and had dismissed the suit. The plaintiff's appeal also met the same fate. 5.On behalf of the appellant it was contended that the duty that was paid by him was paid for the whole of the land and not for a part of it. But both the courts below have negatived this contentio....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....mount of challenged as a condition precedent to the entertainment of his appeal. Mr. Vakharia was fair enough to concede before me when the appeal was heard that this provision which made it obligatory on the part of the appellant citizen, to deposit the amount of the order as a condition precedent to the entertainment of the appeal was set at naught by the Supreme Court in the case of Collector of Customs, Cochin v. A. S. Bava A.I.R. 1968 S.C. 13. If the original order that gets emerged in the appellate order now passed by the Collector, Customs, without extending an opportunity to the plaintiff-appellant to have his say, the order of the Assistant Collector and the appellate order would be void on the ground that the appellant was not giv....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....s very question was urged by the plaintiff-appellant before the learned Assistant Judge at Nadiad, but curiously enough, the learned Judge held that the judgment of the Supreme Court was pronounced subsequent to the order of summary dismissal of the plaintiff's appeal by the Collector of Customs at Baroda. It seems that the learned Judge was of the view that law declared by the highest court of the land came into force only from the day, the judgment is pronounced. This is something grossly unreasonable. The Supreme Court does not enact the law in the sense of the term. It simply interprets it. This means that when the Supreme Court laid down the law on the point in the above mentioned case of Collector of Customs, Cochin it declared that t....