1982 (11) TMI 50

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....cise duty under Item 37A of the First Schedule to the Central Excises and Salt Act as parts or accessories to gramophone. The petitioners were threatened that unless the excise duty on the said products is paid action would be taken under the provisions of the Central Excises and Salt Act and the Central Excise Rules. The petitioners thereupon filed Miscellaneous Petition No. 323 of 1975 in this Court challenging the action of the Assistant Collector of Central Excise.. The Petition was summarily dismissed by the learned single judge by an order dated March 31, 1975 and against the impugned order, the petitioners carried Appeal No. 77 of 1975 before the Division Bench of this Court. The appeal was admitted on May 2, 1975 and on a Notice of ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ust 24, 1979 by the Assistant Collector and thereafter the Assistant Collector visited the factory on November 28, 1979 to ascertain the mode of manufacture of the products. Thereafter the Assistant Collector has passed an order dated December 31, 1979 holding that the products manufactured by the petitioners were not liable to payment of excise duty during the period from March 1, 1975 to June 17, 1977. The petitioners claim that though they were not communicated with this order, they became aware of the same sometime in March, 1980. Thereafter the petitioners addressed a letter to the Assistant Collector on March 20, 1980 enquiring whether such an order is passed and, if so, to furnish a copy thereof. If appears that Mr. Kullarwar who had....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....Mr. Kullarwar did sign the order in favour of the petitioners on December 31, 1979. Mr. Mehta the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents, claimed that even though Mr. Kullarwar, the Assistant Collector had signed the order, still the order would have no force of law and would not come into operation, as long as the same was not communicated to the petitioners. Mr. Mehta submits that it is open for the successor of Mr. Kullarwar to revise the order and the petitioners can make no grievance about the same. In our judgment, the submission is totally untenable. Mr. Kullarwar, the Assistant Collector of Central Excise was holding the office on December 31, 1979 and has passed a valid order duly signed after hearing the petitioner....