Page 338 - ELT_15th June 2020_VOL 372_Part 6th

984 EXCISE LAW TIMES [ Vol. 372
Writ jurisdiction (Contd.)
— Availability of alternate remedy - Refund of Terminal Excise Duty when
sanctioned by DGFT, proper authority is DGFT who can initiate
proceedings against the petitioners for violation of exemption notification
and Advance Authorization Licence - As such, initiation of proceedings
by the Customs is nothing but an exercise of power in excess of
jurisdiction - Customs Department having exercised power in excess of
jurisdiction, then, this Court can exercise its extraordinary writ
jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India — Rajhans Impex
Pvt. Ltd. v. Union of India (Guj.) ............................. 346
— Existence of alternative remedy - Show cause notice issued after more
than two years from finalisation of assessment order, and where there is
change of opinion by issuance of show cause notice, writ petition is
maintainable - Article 226 of Constitution of India — Honda Siel Power
Products v. Union of India (All.) .............................. 30
— Invocation thereof when adjudication order passed after six months of
conclusion of personal hearing and without considering statutory
provisions, affidavit of assessee and decisions produced by him - Writ
petition against such order can be entertained despite availability of
appellate remedy before CESTAT - Article 226 of Constitution of India —
Infra Dredge Services Pvt. Ltd. v. Union of India (Bom.) ................... 691
— Methodology of Adjudication - No interference under writ jurisdiction is
called for in such cases as adjudicating authority is expected to follow
laws as well as judicial precedents - Article 226 of Constitution of India
— Narendra Kumar Jain v. Dinesh Meena, Joint Commr., Cus. (Preventive) (Del.) ....... 247
— Territorial jurisdiction - Notwithstanding that goods were imported in
allocation under Punjab & Haryana High Court, since Settlement order
under challenge has been passed by quasi-judicial authority’s Delhi
Principal Bench, Delhi High Court has territorial jurisdiction to entertain
writ petition - Article 226 of Constitution of India — Principal Additional
Director General, DRI v. Customs, Central Excise and Service Tax Settlement Commission
(Del.) ......................................... 840
Writ Order - Declaratory relief therefrom - Delay in filing petition - Decision
of High Court in earlier writ petition has already considered vires of
Notification No. 21/2002-Cus. as amended by clause 60 of Finance Bill,
2010 and Notification No. 91/2010-Cus. and granted limited relief upto
6-9-2010 by quashing proviso to said notification - Therefore, question of
giving a declaratory relief for further period qua those notifications based
upon the findings recorded in said decision does not arise - As regards
subsequent Notifications No. 12/2012-Cus. and No. 26/2012-Cus., these
were issued during pendency of previous petition which were not
challenged at relevant time - Even in this belated petition, these
notifications have not been challenged per se but only declaratory relief
based on previous judgment sought which cannot be granted as ibid -
Further since these subsequent notifications have not been challenged,
case cannot be taken up on merits also - Article 226 of Constitution of
India — Adani Power Ltd. v. Union of India (Guj.) .................... 60
Writ proceedings for challenging methodology of adjudication proceedings
when not sustainable - See under ADJUDICATION PROCEEDINGS ..... 247
Yarn - Classification of Polypropylene Multi-Filament Yarn - See under
POLYPROPYLENE MULTI-FILAMENT YARN (PPMF) ............ 388
Yeast - Classification of inactive dried yeast - See under ENZYMES ........ 458
Zarda Scented Tobacco vis-à-vis Chewing tobacco, classification of - See
under TOBACCO .................................. 145
_______
EXCISE LAW TIMES  15th June 2020  338