WILLARD STORAGE BATTERIES LTD Vs. CEGAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By means of this writ petition, the petitioner has, inter alia prayed for a writ of certiorari quashing the order dated 4-3-1996, passed by the Central Excise and Gold (Control) Appellate Tribunal, New Delhi directing the petitioner to deposit a sum of Rupees Twenty-Four Lakh under Section 35F of the Central Excises & Salt Act, 1944 (the Act in short).

(2.) I have heard Shri A.P. Mathur, learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner and Shri Shishir Kumar, learned Counsel appearing for the respondents and have perused the averments made in the writ petition. It has been contended that the petitioner has a good prima facie case on merits and the submissions made before the Tribunal has not been noticed. It has further been contended that the petitioner has made out a case of undue hardship under the proviso to Section 35F of the Act. However, the Tribunal has not applied its mind either to this or to the material on record.

(3.) Having heard the learned Counsel for the petitioner, I am of the view that the impugned order passed by the Tribunal calls for no interference by this Court, in the writ jurisdiction. However, if the petitioner's stand in this case is that the Tribunal has not considered or over looked some material ground while passing an order under Section 35F of the Act, it may be open to the petitioner to approach the Tribunal again and bring the said fact to the notice of the Tribunal. I have no doubt that in that event if such an application is filed before the Tribunal, the same shall be considered expeditiously and disposed of in accordance with law.