Volvo Group India Pvt Ltd. Vs Union of India (Bombay High Court)
Conclusion: The order of the original authority becomes merged with the order of the Revisionary Authority. Since the Revisionary Authority was located within the territorial jurisdiction of the Principal Seat of this Court, assessee had the option to file the petitions here or before the High Court within whose jurisdiction the original adjudication occurred. Assessee had the right to file the petitions before the Principal Seat of this Court.
Held: Assessee-company had approached the Court against order passed by Revisionary Authority constituted under Section 35EE of the Central Excise Act, 1944 (the Excise Act). Assessee sought to challenge the legality and validity of orders passed by the Revisionary Authority rejecting the rebate claim filed by assessee. Assessee had filed a rebate claim for rebate of customs duty paid on the raw material purchased under Rule 18 of the Central Excise Rules, 2002 read with Notification No.21/2004-CE(NT) dated 6th September 2004. The show cause notices were issued rejecting the rebate claim on various grounds. In all the petitions the averment was that the impugned order passed by the Revisionary Authority had been issued within the jurisdiction of this Court. The office of the Revisionary Authority was within the jurisdiction of this Court and, hence, the entire cause of action had arisen within the jurisdiction of this Court. Therefore, this Court had jurisdiction to entertain, try and dispose the petition. In the present case, all writ petitions pertained to issues relating to rebate wherein the Revisionary Authority had denied assessee’s claims for rebate. Furthermore, no statutory appeal had been provided for against an order passed under Section 35EE of the Excise Act. Therefore, an aggrieved assessee possessed no alternate remedy other than challenging an order under Section 35EE via a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. Since the Revisionary Authority was located within the territorial jurisdiction of the Principal Seat of this Court, assessee had the option to file the petitions here or before the High Court within whose jurisdiction the original adjudication occurred. Assessee had the right to file the petitions before the Principal Seat of this Court. Hence, on this ground alone, the present petitions were maintainable before the Principal Seat of this Court. It was also trite that once an appeal was decided by an Appellate Authority, the order of the original authority got merged with the order of the Appellate Authority by the principle of doctrine of merger. In effect, the order of the original authority no longer remained, and it was the order of the Appellate Authority which prevailed and was amenable to challenge. Hence, the order of the Appellate Authority formed a significant part of the cause of action for assessee.
