Union Of India And Ors. vs Tata Engineering And Locomotive CO., Ltd, Etc.
- SCC(1997) 8 SCC 730
- Neutral1997 INSC 723
- AIRAIR 1998 SC 287
- SCR[1997] Supp (5) SCR 109
Ratio decidendi
The rule this decision rests on
In an excise assessment proceeding, the High Court, exercising writ jurisdiction under Article 226, cannot issue directions controlling the mode and manner in which an assessment officer conducts enquiries or calls for documents; the assessment officer is entitled to exercise his judgment as to what documents are relevant for assessment and what enquiries are necessary for determining the value of excisable goods, provided the assessee retains statutory remedies of appeal and revision against any final assessment order. The High Court errs in entertaining a writ petition challenging an assessment during the pendency of the proceedings or directing the assessment officer to pass a final order on certain grounds; the determination of whether the assessment officer is bound by an earlier judgment of the High Court on the same issue is a matter for the assessment officer himself to decide as a question of fact and law within his jurisdiction.
Written by Miss Lucy from the judgment below, not taken from a headnote.
Judgment
As delivered
Union of India has come up in appeal against the judgment and order of the Division Bench of the Patna High Court directing the Assistant Collector of Central Excise, Jamshedpur, to pass without delay appropriate final order on all the price lists already submitted by the Company. The Court also held that the price at which the Company sold the vehicles at the factory gate at Jamshedpur should be the normal price for the purpose of computation of the value of the excisable goods. The Court also held that the Assistant Collector of Central Excise could only call for relevant documents for the purpose of assessment of the value of the excisable goods. In the facts of this case, price lists of Regional Sales Offices of Tata Engineering & Locomotive Co. (TELCO) could not be said to be relevant for passing final orders on the price lists submitted by the company.
The appellant has contended that it was necessary for the Excise Officer to examine the price at the Regional Sales Offices because two types of prices were being charged at the factory gate of the Company at Jamshedpur. It has been contended in reply that the bulk of the sales made by the Company was to the dealers; a small portion of sales was effected to sub-dealers directly for which full particulars were furnished. Moreover, this point was not raised before that High Court when the writ petition was heard.
In our view, this writ petition should not have been entertained by the High Court at all. The Assistant Collector is entitled to complete the assessment as he thinks fit in exercise of his judgment and according to his understanding of the law and facts. For this purpose, he can call for and examine whatever documents he considers relevant. If the Assistant Collector fails to follow any judgment of the High Court or this court, the assessee had adequate statutory remedies by way of an appeal and revision against the assessment order. The Court should not try to control the mode and manner in which an assessment should be made. If the Assistant Collector is of the view that enquiries are necessary to be made as to the price at which trucks were sold at the Regional Sales Offices, the Court cannot stop him from making such enquiries.
Mr. Sorabjee, appearing on behalf of the respondents, has complained that the assessments are going on endlessly and without due regard to an earlier judgment of the Patna High Court in respect of an earlier assessment year on the very same issues. Whether the controversy raised in this case is covered by an earlier judgment of the High Court is a matter to be decided by the Assistant Collector. He will have to decide all questions of fact and law. He has to make whatever enquiries he thinks necessary for determination of the value of excisable goods. The High Court in exercise of its jurisdiction cannot give guidance to Assistant Collector about the manner and mode in which the assessment should be made.
We are of the view that the High Court was in error in entertaining this writ petition. Therefore, the appeal is allowed and the judgment of the High Court under appeal is set aside. There will be no order as to costs.
The Assistant Collector is directed to complete the assessment as expeditiously as possible.
Appeal allowed.
This page reproduces a public judgment and a summary of it. It is research material, not legal advice, and it is no substitute for advice from an advocate on your own facts.
Research this judgment with Miss Lucy
Ask what it holds, what has followed it, and what it means for your matter — in plain English, with the citations.
Try Miss Lucy free