Civil Writ Petition No.11208 of 1989 -1- **** IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 1. Civil Writ Petition No.11208 of 1989 Date of decision: 2.12.2010 Dashmesh Steel Rolling Mills ..Petitioner Versus Union of India and another ..Respondents. 2. Civil Writ Petition No.12561 of 1989 Arun Steel & Agro Industries Re-Rollers & Fabricators , Mandi Gobindergarh. ...Petitioner Versus Union of India and another ...Respondents 3. Civil Writ Petition No.12562 of 1989 Shri Ambica Steel Industries Re-Rollers & Fabricators ...Petitioner Versus Union of India and another ...Respondents 4. Civil Writ Petition No.12563 of 1989 Sukhdev Steel Rolling Mills Re-Rollers & Fabricators ...Petitioner Versus Union of India and others ...Respondents 5. Civil Writ Petition No.1757 of 1990 Civil Writ Petition No.11208 of 1989 -2- **** M/s Panesar Steel & Agro Industries Alour ...Petitioner Versus Union of India and another ...Respondents 6. Civil Writ Petition No.6661 of 1991 M/s Shri Nar Singh Steel Rolling Corporation Model Town, Mandi Gobindgarh ...Petitioner Versus Union of India and another ...Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE ADARSH KUMAR GOEL HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE AJAY KUMAR MITTAL Present: Mr. J.S.Toor, Advocate for the petitioner Mr. H.P.S.Ghuman, Senior Standing Counsel for respondents **** ADARSH KUMAR GOEL, J ( Oral) This order will dispose of Civil Writ Petition Nos.11208, 12561, 12562, 12563 of 1989, 1757 of 1990 and 6661of 1991 as in all the writ petitions a direction has been sought for refund of excise duty paid under the provisions of Central Excise Act, 1944. In Civil Writ Petition No.11208 of 1989, case of the petitioner is that it had been paying duty by mistake under tariff item 26AA(ia) and the mistake was discovered after the judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in Collector of Central Excise and others Vs. M/s Calcutta Steel Industries and others AIR 1989 Supreme Court, 603. The amount of duty paid under mistake is liable to be Civil Writ Petition No.11208 of 1989 -3- **** refunded. The petitioner paid excise duty amounting to more than ` 4 lacs and claimed refund vide letter Annexure P/3 but the said prayer was declined on the ground that the matter was pending before Hon'ble the Supreme Court. Other petitions are identical. In reply filed in Civil Writ Petition No.12561 of 1989, the stand taken is that claim of the petitioner for the refund was rejected against which no appeal has been filed by the petitioner. We have heard learned counsel for the parties. Learned counsel for the respondents submits that in view of judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Mafatlal Industries Ltd. and others Vs. Union of India and others (1997) 5 Supreme Court cases 536, claim of the petitioner is not maintainable. In any case, since the petitioner has statutory remedy of appeal, the writ petition may not be considered on merits. In view of the above, petitioners having not taken alternative remedy of filing the appeal, these writ petitions are dismissed without prejudice to the alternative remedy of appeal in accordance with law. (Adarsh Kumar Goel) Judge December 02,2010 (Ajay Kumar Mittal) Pka Judge