Supreme Court
Supreme Court Upholds Bombay High Courts Judgment Holding That Predeposits Mandated Under Statutes For Filing Appeals Cannot Be Waived In Exercise Of Writ Jurisdiction
Supreme Court

Supreme Court Upholds Bombay High Court's Judgment Holding That Predeposits Mandated Under Statutes For Filing Appeals Cannot Be Waived In Exercise Of Writ Jurisdiction

Aastha Kaushik
|
1 March 2024 2:30 PM GMT

The Supreme Court has dismissed the SLP filed against a judgment of the Bombay High Court which held that under writ jurisdiction, it cannot interfere with the precondition of deposit for filing an appeal.

A Special Leave Petition (SLP) was filed challenging the judgment passed by the Bombay High Court. Before the High Court, the Petitioner challenged an order of the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal which dismissed the appeal, without adjudicating the matter on merits, due to non-compliance with a condition imposed under Section 35-F of the Central Excise Act, 1944.

In the Supreme Court, the Bench of Justice B.V. Nagarathna and Justice Augustine George Masih held, “We are not inclined to interfere in the matter. The special leave petition is, hence, dismissed.”

Advocate Rajiv Shankar Dvivedi appeared on behalf of the Petitioner and Senior Advocate Rupesh Kumar and ASG Vikramjeet Banerjee appeared on behalf of the Respondents.

The Division Bench of Bombay High Court held, “The argument of the learned counsel that this Court in writ jurisdiction can waive this condition or relax or dilute its rigors, is without any merit. The writ jurisdiction is not meant to grant any benefit to parties like the petitioner or to enable him to get over such precondition. Once the statutory precondition for entertaining an appeal has been upheld and that does not violate the mandate of Article 14 and 19(1)(g) of the Constitution of India nor does it make the right of appeal illusory, then, this writ petition cannot be entertained. It is dismissed, but subject to above.”

Accordingly, the Supreme Court dismissed the petition.

Cause Title: Kantilal Bhaguji Mohite v. Commissioner, Central Excise and Service Tax-Pune III

Appearance:

Petitioner: Advocates Rajiv Shankar Dvivedi, Pravin Satale, Rishabh Jain, SK Sarkar.

Respondent: Senior Advocate Rupesh Kumar, ASG Vikramjeet Banerjee, Advocates Raj Bahadur Yadav, Nalin Kohli, Aruna Gupta, Navanjay Mohapatra.

Click here to view/download Order


Similar Posts