Decided on October 05,1993

JAndK Cigarettes Ltd Respondents


- (1.)THESE two Letters Patent Appeals owe their origin to two orders of the appellant No. 4 dated 6 -3 -1993 and 13 -3 -1993, whereby he called upon the respondents to forthwith deposit an amount of Rs 1,18,22,903.65 and Rs 73,02,268.20 respectively by way of Central Excise Duty. In this regard writ petition nos. 274 of 1993 and 275 of 1993, respectively, were preferred before the learned Single Bench of this Court, saying that such a demand is unwarranted, it being inoperative and inconsistent with the law as laid down by the Honble Supreme Court of India in the case of Maharashtra Tubes Ltd. vs State Industrial & Investment Corporation of Maharashtra Ltd. reported in 1993 (1) Scale.
(2.)ON the presentation of the aforesaid two writ petitions the operation of impugned orders was stayed by the learned Single Judge by his order dated 17 -3 -1993 and rule nisi was issued.
(3.)AFTER objections were filed, the parties were heard a common consent order was passed by the learned Single Judge on 24 -5 -1993.
Aggrieved of such order the present two Letter Patent Appeals have been preferred on various grounds saying that the learned Single Judge did not properly appreciate the points raised by the respondents in the writ petitions and he did not appreciate the scope of Sick Industrial Companies (Special Provision) Act, 1985, and did also not properly follow the law laid down by the Honble Supreme Court of India in the case of Maharashtra Tubes Ltd. According to the appellants, from perusal of the Act end the Judgment of the Supreme Court, it becomes manifestly clear that the said judgment of the Supreme Court has no application on the merits of the case for in the present case the recovery of central excise is involved; that the learned Single Judge did not give proper weight to the arguments of the appellants that the industrial unit was not a sick unit, nor has the same been declared as sick unit by the Board in question The Unit which has been declared as sick unit by the Board was the Holiday Resort in Pahalgam. The Holiday Resort Unit was a separate unit from the Industrial Units, which was manufacturing excisable goods. Both the Units, were maintaining separate balance sheets. Besides, various other pleas with regard to the legality of the case have been taken, which need not require any adjudication in any manner for the fact that the impugned order has been passed on the consent of the parties, and therefore, learned counsel for the respondents, Mr. Ramaswamy, raised a preliminary objection to the maintainability of these appeals on the ground that the order impugned passed by the learned Single Judge is a consent order end, therefore, the L. P. As are not maintainable.

Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.