The jurisdiction of the Civil Court is not barred in cases where the levy and realization of taxes or duties are challenged as being without any authority of law and wholly without jurisdiction.

S. K. Jha, J.

1. These two first appeals are directed against a common judgment and decree dated the 26th February, 1969, passed by the Subordinate Judge, Jamshedpur dismissing the plaintiff appellants suits on the short ground of their non-maintainability on account of the lack of jurisdiction of the Civil Court to go into the question involved in the suits.

2. Since in these appeals is involved a limited question of law as to whether the suits are maintainable under Sec.9 of the Code of Civil Procedure or are barred under the provisions of the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944 (1 of 1944) (herainafter referred to as the Excise Act ). it is not necessary for we to go into any detailed statement of facts pleaded specially as no finding of fact has been recorded by the court below. The appellant is the well known Tata Iron and. Steel Company Limited of Jameshedpur engaged in the manufacture of iron, steel and allied products including steel ingots. First Appeal No.222 of 1969 arises out of Money Suit No.62 of 1966 whereas First Appeal No.221 of 1969 arises out of Money Suit No.61 of 1966 both instituted by the appellant in the court below. Money Suit No.62 aforesaid was for a money decree for a sum of Rs.2,80,593.44 paise whereas in Money Suit No.61 of 1966 a money claim of Rs 41,79.141.68 was made. Both these sums were prayed to be recovered by way of refund from the defendants respondents as having been allegedly illegally realised without any authority of law as excise duty in the purported exercise of the defendants respondents power under the Excise Act. The point involved is common and the facts please are also common in both the suits except with regard to the amounts involved and the item of produce which has been subjected to excise duty. Whereas in Money Suit No.62 of 1966 from which First Appeal No.220 of 1969 arises the claim in based upon the alleged illegal realisation of excise duty on steel ingots out of steel scrap which had already borne excise duty, in First Appeal No.221 of 1969 arising out of Money Suit No.61 of 1966, the plaintiff has based its claim on such realisation of Central Excise duty on steel ingots manufactured out of the old iron and steel scraps termed by the appellants the pre-excise stock of skull scrap The appellants main case was that both the aforesaid types of steel ingots, produced either from out of steel scraps which had already borne excise duty or from the pre-excise stock of skull scraps, are exempt from excise duty by a Notification G. S. R. No.75 of 1962 issued on the 24th April 1962 under the provisions of the Excise Act and as such realisation of the aforesaid two sums purported to be the excise duty was without any authority of law and wholly without jurisdiction. In view of the Notification aforesaid the plaintiff appellant applied refund of the excise duties aforesaid illegally realised from it but the Assistant Collector of Excise (defendant respondent No.3) rejected the claim for refund. The plaintiff preferred an appeal before the Collector of Central Excise (defendant respondent No.2) which also failed. Ultimately, a revision application to the Central Government (defendant respondent No.1) was also rejected.

3. It may be mentioned here that during the pendency of the suits in the court below two writ applications were filed in this court under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India being Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.1239 of 1965 and 1238 of 1965 relating to the very claims made by the plaintiff in the present suits, but those writ applications were founded upon the main grounds that the provisions of the Excise Act and the rules made thereunder were unconstitutional and that there had been a violation of the principles of natural justice in so far as no reasonable opportunity was given to the appellant (petitioner in those cases) for being heard and as such the orders passed by the Central Excise authorities were without jurisdiction. In these writ