Double recovery of excise duty barred where duty was already embedded in the controlled sale price of skelp.

Where the purchase price of skelp already included excise duty realised by the supplier under the Joint Plant Committee arrangement, the revenue could not demand the same duty again from the purchaser on the same transaction. The Court rejected the suggestion that the purchaser should first recover the amount from the supplier and then pay the department, treating that approach as unfair and unsupported. The operative effect was to prevent double recovery of excise duty on the same goods, and the writ was allowed to that extent without costs.

---

---

Issues: Whether any further excise duty was payable by the petitioner on skelp purchased from the supplier, where the purchase price already included excise duty recovered by the supplier.

Analysis: The purchase price of the skelp was found to include excise duty already realised by the supplier under the arrangement fixed by the Joint Plant Committee. In view of the earlier Supreme Court ruling on the same commodity and the material on record, the Court held that the excise department could not demand the same duty again from the petitioner. The suggestion that the petitioner should recover the amount from the supplier and then pay the department was rejected as unfair and unsupported.

Conclusion: No further amount was due to the excise department from the petitioner in respect of the skelp purchase.

Final Conclusion: The writ succeeded to the extent that the petitioner was protected against double recovery of excise duty on the same transaction, and the rule was made absolute accordingly without costs.

Ratio Decidendi: Where excise duty has already been realised as part of the controlled sale price of the goods, the revenue cannot demand the same duty again from the purchaser on the same transaction.

---