2001 (3) TMI 116

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ted against the common order made by the CEGAT, dated 23-5-2000 made in Appeal Nos. C/285/98, C/284/98, C/1183/98, C/280/98, C/281/98 and C/283/98. 2. The main contention raised in these writ petitions is that the Respondent Excise authorities without properly classifying the subject goods have assumed the jurisdiction and levied the duty and therefore the impugned orders suffer from flaw of ju....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ppeal shall lie to the Supreme Court. Under Section 35G of the Central Excise Act, the Commissioner of Central Excise or any other aggrieved party may seek reference to the High Court on a question of law arising out of any order. Therefore, it is quite clear that against the impugned order of the CEGAT, the Petitioners being aggrieved parties can seek reference of the question of law that has bee....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ers made by the CEGAT. That is not the question before this Court. The question before the Court is whether this Court should invoke its discretionary jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to review the impugned order of the CEGAT when the Petitioner has equal, efficacious and comprehensive legal remedies under Sections 35G and H of the Act since it is case of the Petitioners....