: 1 : IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY Ordinary Original Civil Jurisdiction Ordinary Original Civil Jurisdiction Ordinary Original Civil Jurisdiction WRIT PETITION NO.442 OF 2009 WRIT PETITION NO.442 OF 2009 WRIT PETITION NO.442 OF 2009 WITH WITH WITH CENTRAL EXCISE APPEAL (L) NO.8 OF 2009 CENTRAL EXCISE APPEAL (L) NO.8 OF 2009 CENTRAL EXCISE APPEAL (L) NO.8 OF 2009 WITH WITH WITH NOTICE OF MOTION NO.1181 OF 2009 NOTICE OF MOTION NO.1181 OF 2009 NOTICE OF MOTION NO.1181 OF 2009 Commissioner of Central Excise ...Petitioner. V/s. M/s.Coromandel Fertilizers Ltd. ...Respondent. Mr.A.S.Rao , adv. for the Petitioner. Mr.H.S.Prasad, AGM (Indirect Tax) representative of respondent present in person. CORAM: F.I.Rebello & CORAM: F.I.Rebello & CORAM: F.I.Rebello & J.H.Bhatia,JJ J.H.Bhatia,JJ J.H.Bhatia,JJ. DATE : 15th April, 2009. DATE : 15th April, 2009. DATE : 15th April, 2009. P.C.: P.C.: P.C.: 1. Rule. Heard forthwith. 2. Respondents are represented by their A.G.M. Shri H.S.Prasad (Indirect Tax). Petitioner herein also filed an appeal being Central Excise Appeal (Lodging) No.312 of 2009. 3. The appeal preferred by the petitioner herein was dismissed on the ground of authorisation which was required while filing the appeal has been signed by Commissioner Belapur, alone due to the reason, that during the relevant : 2 : period the Commissioner Central Excise, Belapur was holding additional charge of Commissioner Central Excise, Raigad. The Tribunal relied upon an earlier order and dismissed the appeal. 4. Firstly, defect if any is procedural and an irregularity and not illegality. In these circumstances, the petitioner should have been given an opportunity to cure the irregularity. That was not done. Even otherwise, if at the relevant time, the Commissioner, Belapur was holding additional charge of Central Excise, Raigad, there was no defect. Our attention is drawn to the earlier order which was relied upon by the learned Tribunal. Law is settled that procedure should not be allowed to come in the way of justice. It is not meant to trip justice. In the instant case, the very defect, if any was procedural. In such cases, opportunities must be given to the parties to cure such defects. 5. Considering the above, the impugned order is set aside. Appeal is restored to the file of CESTAT. . It will hear the appeal on merits including all the contentions raised by the respondents including on limitation. 6. Rule made absolute accordingly. No order as to : 3 : costs. 7. As the petition is allowed, nothing further survive in Central Excise Appeal (L) No.8 of 2009 alongwith Notice of Motion No.118 of 2009 and accordingly, both are disposed off. (F.I.Rebello, J.) (F.I.Rebello, J.) (F.I.Rebello, J.) (J.H.Bhatia, J.) (J.H.Bhatia, J.) (J.H.Bhatia, J.)