^,.^ yr' ^ •^ HIGHCOURTOFCHHArriSGARH:BIUVSPUR^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^m SINGLEBENCH : HON'BLE SHRI JAGDISH BHALLA, Ag. CJ i ^ Writ PetiUon m No. 7083 of2007 PETmONERS 1. M/sABS Metals (P) Ltd., 129-ALigMt Industrial Area, Bhilai - Through its Director, Anil Kumar Agrawal, S/o Late Shri B.L. Agrawal, Aged about 45 years, R/o: 10, Old Motilal Nehru Nagar, Bhilai, Distt. Duig (C.G.) 2. Smt. Uma Agrawal, W/o Shri Anil KumarAgrawal, Aged about 43 years, Director, M/sABS Metals (P) Ltd., 129- A bight Indystrial Area, Bhilai, R/o 10, Otd. Motilai Nehru Nagar, Bhilai, Distt. DurgtC.G,), : ' VERSUS RESPONDENTS 1. . Union oflndia-Through.TheSecretary, Ministry of Finance, New Delhi 2. The Member, Central Board ofExcise and Customs, Government of India, Ministry of Finance, Department of Revenue, New Delhi.':.:::::'....,..: ..:.,:. 3. The Chief Coromissioner (Bhopal Zone), Customs and Central Excise, 48 Adniinistratjve Area,: Arara Hills, Hoshangabad Road, Bhopal (M.P.) 4. TheCommissioner, Customs andCentral Excise, Central Excise Buitding, Dhamtari < Rogd,TikraPara,Raipur(CG.) 5. The Deputy Commissioner, Customs and Central Excise, Division- II, Bhilai, Distt. Durg(C.G.) Writ Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India : Present: Shri P. Diwakar, Sr. Advocate with Shri Adil Minhaj, counsel for the petitionere. Shri Manish Sharma, counsel for Union of India. MB!tI!-':<'S,^ ORALORDER (Passed bnS'" Oecember,2007) A preliminary objection has been raised regarding the maintainability of the petition on the ground that the alternative efficacious remedy of filing appeal is available to the petitioner under Clause (c) of sub-Seotion (1) of SeGtion 35-B ofCentral Exoise Act, 1944. It has been submitted on behalfef' Union oFlndiathattheorderhasbeenpassed bythe Member, Central Boafd? 'T^ "\ 2-- kamde of Excise and Customs. He relies upon the part of the notificatipn under Central Exeise Rules which reads as follows:- "[2] Evasion - Deterent-action against tax evadere-Member (C.E.), C.B.E. & C. authorized to issue restriction order.- In pursuance of rule 12 CC oftrte Central Excise Rules, 2002, aild rule 12AA of the CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004, made' under the Central ExciseAct, 1944 (1of 1944), the Central Board of.Excise and Customs authorizes Member (Central Excise), Ceritral Board of Exoiseand Customsto issue orders in terms of Notifioation No. 32G006-C.E. (N.T.), dated 30"' December, 2006." "(3) An effieer authorized by the Board shall examine the Fecommendations received from the Chief Commissioner of Central Excise or Director General of Cenfral Excise ^ Intelligence and issue an order specifying the type of facilities to bewithdr'awn ortype of'resfrictions imposed, along with the' period fbr which said faoilities: will not be avaitable or the period forwhich the resfrictionsshall toeoperative." Learned counsel for the petitionerssubmits that the impugned order has not been passed under the provisions of law. However, he did not indioatethat under which provision of law the orderhas been passed. \ In the tight of abpve djscussien, it has been submitted that the Member, Board is authorized to pass an order on behalf of Central Board of Excise and Customs. Therefore, theorderpassed bythe Member amounts to the order passed by theBoard. ' 1 do not find.force in the argumeht ofthe.petitionere. The writ petition is thus disposed of on the ground of availability of alternative remedy. Sd/- Ag. Chief Justlce