M/S Shamli Paper Mills Limited vs The Commissioner Of Central ...
2012 Latest Caselaw 1788 ALL

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
 
 

?Court No. - 32
 

 
1. Case :- CENTRAL EXCISE APPEAL No. - 593 of 2012
 

 
Petitioner :- M/S Shamli Paper Mills Limited
 
Respondent :- The Commissioner Of Central Excise,Meerut
 
Petitioner Counsel :- A.P.Mathura
 
Respondent Counsel :- Ssc/S.P.Kesarwani
 
CONNECTED WITH
 
Case :- CENTRAL EXCISE APPEAL No. - 594 of 2012
 

 
Petitioner :- M/S Sikka Papers Ltd.
 
Respondent :- The Commissioner Of Central Excise,Meerut
 
CONNECTED WITH 
 
Case :- CENTRAL EXCISE APPEAL No. - 595 of 2012
 

 
Petitioner :- Shri Vinay Bansal, Diretor M/S Sikka Papers Ltd.
 
Respondent :- The Commissioner Of Central Excise
 

 

 
Hon'ble Ashok Bhushan,J.

Hon'ble Prakash Krishna,J.

Heard the learned counsel for the appellants and Sri R.C. Shukla learned counsel for the respondent in Central Excise Appeal No. 593 of 2012 and Central Excise Appeal No. 594 of 2012 and Sri Siddarth Shukla, learned counsel for the respondent in Central Excise Appeal No. 595 of 2012.

These three appeals have been filed under Section 35G of the Central Excise Act, 1944 against common order dated 15.09.2011 passed by Customs Excise & Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (the Tribunal) by which three appeals filed by the above mentioned three appellants have been dismissed.

Sri A.P. Mathur, learned counsel for the appellants submits that although in memo of appeal several grounds were taken and were also pressed before the Tribunal but there is no consideration of the aforesaid grounds which were pressed before the Tribunal.

It is well settled that if the appellant comes with the case before higher Court that grounds urged have not been considered, his remedy is to approach to the same Court for consideration. It is for the same Court/Tribunal to consider as to whether any ground which has been pressed has been omitted from consideration.

In view of the above discussions, these appeals cannot be entertained. The appellants may seek remedy in accordance with law.

These appeal are dismissed subject to above observations.

(Prakash Krishna,J)       (Ashok Bhushan,J)

Order Date :- 15.5.2012

MK/