1985 (6) TMI 37

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... question alone this petition is restricted at the time of its final hearing relates to the validity of Notification No. 155 of 1972 (hereinafter the impugned notification) dated 15th June, 1972 issued by the Central Government in exercise of its powers under Rule 8 of the Central Excise Rules, 1944. 2. Hearing on this question rival submissions of the respective Counsel - Mr. R.K. Habbu, for t....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....here involved is or is not covered by it. This latter question falls squarely outside the challenge to the very validity of the impugned notification and is de hors the same. Indeed, it assumes the impugned notification to be valid but with a proviso that the petitioners' case is not covered thereunder. As regards the merits of the petitioners' claim de hors the challenge to the legality and valid....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... to the petitioners to raise the same before the appropriate authorities under the Central Excises and Salt Act and as regards the latter challenge — as indicated - I find no merit therein. 4. Mr. Habbu invited my attention to the ruling in Empire Dyeing and Manufacturing Co. Ltd. v. V.P. Bhide and Others, 1977 (1) Excise Law Times (J 34). The said ruling, however, does not help the petitione....