(1.) Material on record discloses that appellants Anil Jain, M/s. Refex Industries Ltd., Chennai and M/s. Sherisha Technologies Pvt Ltd, Chennai, along with two others, viz., Lalitha, Deputy General Manager, M/s. Sherisha Technologies Pvt Ltd., and A.Ravi, Production-in-charge, M/s. Refex Industries Ltd., have filed W.P.Nos.33074 to 33078 of 2017, praying for a writ of declaration, to declare that issuance of the second show cause notice, in F.No.DRI/CZU/VIII/48/ENQ-01/(INT-05)/2015, dated 23/1/2016, issued in pursuance of the order-in-original No.40007/2015, in F.No.CAU/DRI/CHE/19/2015, passed by the Commissioner of Customs (Chennai II) and the consequential proceedings No.50231/2016 in F.No.CAU/DRI/CHE/32/2016, dated 23/9/2016, passed by the second respondent, with reference to the petitioners companies as ultra vires and against the provisions of the Customs Act, 1962 and hence illegal, invalid and non est in the eye of law.
(2.) By observing that the petitioners therein have an effective and alternative remedy, by way of an appeal, before the CESTAT and that such a prayer cannot be entertained, writ Court, vide, common order, dated 20/12/2017, in W.P.Nos.33074 to 33078 of 2017, dismissed the writ petitions and further observed that dismissal of the same would not prevent the petitioners therein from working out their remedies, in accordance with law, under the provisions of the Customs Act, 1962, if so advised.
(3.) Mr.Velayutham Pichaiya, learned counsel for the appellants submitted that Lalitha, Deputy General Manager, M/s. Sherisha Technologies Pvt Ltd and A.Ravi, Production-in-charge, M/s. Refex Industries Ltd., (writ petitioners in W.P.Nos.33075 and 33076 of 2017) have filed appeals before the CESTAT, Madras. Placing reliance on the decision of the High Court of Hyderabad, in Syed Irfan Mohammed Vs. Union of India, (2017) 349 ELT 462 (AP), learned counsel for the appellants submitted that second show cause notice is impermissible.