M A BABU Vs. UNION OF INDIA REPRESENTE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Introduction:

(2.) There are three writ petitions, and all of them question the assessment orders at various stages. In W.P.(C) No.11302 of 2018, the Deputy Chief Engineer of the Kerala State Electricity Board Limited ("the Electricity Board") questions the Ext.P3 assessment order. That order imposes Service Tax on one unit of the Electricity Board. In W.P. (C) No.6 of 2018, the petitioner assails the penalty under Section 12 (a&b) of the Customs Act. In W.P. (C) No.24129 of 2018, the petitioner, a Co-operative Society, suffered the Ext.P1 assessment order and filed the Ext.P2 appeal before the Commissioner of Appeals. But, through the Ext.P3, the Appellate authority rejected the appeal on the grounds of limitation. Though each writ petition raises a distinct issue, they have all been taken up together because the Revenue has taken one consistent stand: These petitioners have an efficacious alternative remedy.

(3.) Given the preliminary objection the Revenue has raised, I will confine myself to only that question of alternative remedy. And I refer to the facts to the extent relevant to decide this preliminary issue.