mmmma HIGH COURT OF C’HHARTTIgGARH AT BILASPUR coram:- Hon’bie S‘hri D n & dra Mishra handmk “x °A$E N6 3E 6F 2W AP PELLANT Elistl'ict Korba Cl‘lhattisgarh. Kama, Versus RESPONDENTS 1 1 . unvw Lines, F ai'pur (CG) 2. Central Commissidher: Customs and Central Cw‘ice, Excise and Gold (Control) Appellaze Tr§bunaL New De‘hi. (Appea‘ Under Section 35(6) C gn’cra Excise Act, 1944) Dr‘ N.K‘ Shukla Senior A1 Shaiiendra Shukba, nouns Shri Bhishma Kinger, COL & Mechanica\ Workshap) Centre! Revenue Buikiing, CM! .. Present‘ ‘jvocate with Ms. Ritu Misnra & Shri ,el for the appellant. nSel for respondents. (Passed on 1: Per Hon’ble Dhirendra Mishra, J:- The appeilant has filed the inste vcise Ad 1.944 against the e! P4) passed by the Central Excise ai whereby the appeai preferred by thi pmduced in the workshop was dismis Weev/ _.A . . ...., Jenna! Oral Onggg; 3—05-2009) mt petition under Section 35((3) of the der dated. 4‘“ August, 2005 (Annexure 1d Gold (Controi) Appeiiate Tribunal) = appellant in relation to the goods sed and the claim of the appellant for Mew South Eastern Coalfields Limited: (Central Electrical ‘ hi Ca! mam WW WW %Q‘§W $Wm exemption under Notmcation No.63/95-CE. dated 16-03-1995 has been rejected However, wnile upholding the order of the Commissioner Excise, Iearned Tribunal has waived the imposition of penalty against the appelrant 3. Before arguments could be adva need by'the appellant on admission based on the proposed substantial questions of law, a preliminary objection was raised by learned counsel for the respondents that it was necessary for the appellant being a Public Sector Undertaking to obtain clearahce’from the Committee of Dispute (COD) before tiling an appeal before the income Tax Department. ln the absence of clearance by COD, the instant appeal is not. entertainable, Reiiance has been placed in the matter of Tamil Nadu Sugar Corporation 'Ltd. V. Shte of Tamil Na ‘u [2009 21 VST 158 (Mad)'_l 4. Learned counsel for the parties a e heard on the aforesaid preliminary objection of the respondents. 5. lt is not in dispute that the insta t appeal has been filed by sECL, a subsidiary of Coal india Ltd, a Public S ctor Undertaking, wholly owned and controiied by the Government of lndia and the appeai has been preferred against the income Tax Department of overnment of India. 6i in the matter of Tamil Nadu ugar Corporation Ltd. (Supra), the Division Bench of Madras High Court relying upon the judgments of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the matters f Oil and Natural Gas Corpn. V. City industrial Development Corporation, M harashtra Ltd. [20071 7 SOC 39, Oil and Natural Gas commission V. Coile tor ofCentral Excise [1 995] Supp 4 New SCC 541, Oil & Natural Gas Commiss ion v.7 Collector of Central Excise Sector Undertaking before filing an [20041 6 SCC 437 has held that Public appeal against the order of Commissioner, income Tax Department has to obtain clearance from the COD. 7‘ the case of Chief Conservator of i =orests, Government of A.P. V. beenheld that the rezision is not Collector, [2003} 3 SCC 472, it has entertainable in the absence of clearance zfrom COD. Further referring to the fonowing c bserVations of the Supreme Court in “Disputes between Gover be contested in Court. StateiUr mechanism for resolving interc Constitution of Committees sugg of Chief Secretary, Secretai concerned, Secretary of Law (where financial Commitments a re involved) whose decision nts concerned.“ should be binding on ail departm nment Departments cannot iion of lndia must evolve a e‘partmental controversies. ested which should consist ies ‘of the departments and Secretary of Finance 8. Dr. N.K. Shukla, learned Senior Advocate appearing on behalf of the appellant fairly admitted that no certiti ate from COD has been obtained by the Company before filing the appeai. 9. in view of the above! we are of the opinion that the instant appeal is not entertainable in the absence of clea ance from CoD constituted as per the directions of the Hon‘bie Supreme Ooutt. appellant to move this Court after obtaining «J ’ZQJ Sdl- Dhirendra Mishra Judge Kvr Sdl- R.N. Chandrakal‘ Judge WeW However, liberty is reserved to the i clearance from the C0D.