The High Court held that if the Tribunal's order caused prejudice, the remedy lies in filing a rectification application before the Tribunal. Since the Court can only entertain substantive questions of law under Section 35G, the appeal was disposed of without admission.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
CEA No.96 of 2009(O&M) Date of Order: 6.10.2009
M/s United Chain Industries
...Appellant
Versus
Commissioner of Central Excise
....Respondent
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.M. KUMAR HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JASWANT SINGH Present: Mr. Jagmohan Bansal, Advocate for the appellant.
Learned counsel for the appellant states that while hearing the application for stay, the Tribunal has decided the main appeal, which has resulted in causing prejudice to the case of the appellant. He has further submitted that the order of the Settlement Commission dated 11.2.2008 (Annexure A.2) has also not been taken into account by the Tribunal and, therefore, great prejudice has been caused to the case of the appellant.
After hearing learned counsel for the appellant at some length, we are of the view that if the aforesaid facts are correct, then the remedy of the appellant is to file appropriate application before the Tribunal and seek rectification of the order of the Tribunal instead of rushing to this Court because this Court could admit the appeal only on a substantive question of law as envisaged under Section35G of the Central Excise Act, 1944. Accordingly, the appellant is relegated to the remedy of filing rectification application before the Tribunal.
Appeal stands disposed of.
October 06, 2009 ( JASWANT SINGH ) manoj JUDGE
1 issue framed by the court
Whether an appeal to the High Court under Section 35G of the Central Excise Act can be admitted if the underlying adjudication by the Tribunal is defective or prejudicial.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
M/s United Chain Industries
Commissioner of Central Excise
M.M. KUMAR
JASWANT SINGH
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
