- (1.) By this writ petition, a challenge is made to the communication dated 01.11.2013. A prayer is also made to direct the respondents to refund the amount of Rs.2,69,13,974/- recovered towards excise duty. The interest @18% p.a. has also been claimed.
(2.) Learned counsel for petitioner submits that a tender was floated by the respondents. The petitioner-company submitted bid without taking component of excise duty as it was exempted on pipelines apart from other material forming part of the contract. The petitioner-company undertook the work but excise duty was deducted by the respondents from running bills contrary to the terms of agreement. The petitioner-company completed the work successfully and made an application to refund the amount towards excise duty illegally deducted from their running bills. The respondents did not consider the issue aforesaid thus petitioner was let with no option but to approach the committee under Clause 23 of General Conditions of Agreement. The committee rejected the claim in reference to Clauses 3.2 and 18 of the Special Conditions of Contract. The order passed by the committee has been challenged. When exemption from excise duty exists, it could not have been recovered by the respondents. Even as per Central Excise Act, if recovery of the excise duty is to be made, it is by the Excise Department only thus recovery of the excise duty by the respondents was without authority of law. Taking into consideration the aforesaid, impugned order dated 01.11.2013 deserves to be set aside with a direction to the respondents to refund the amount of Rs.2,69,13,974/-.
(3.) Learned counsel for respondents has opposed the petition. A preliminary objection has been raised about maintainability of the writ petition as it is arising out of contract and needs finding of fact. The contractual matters cannot be brought before this court by invoking Article 226 of the Constitution of India. The petitioner- company has remedy to prefer a civil suit for recovery of the amount, if any.;