REDIHOT ELECTRICALS Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Amongst many others, one of the commandments of dharma is that if you borrow any money from another for a particular period then it must be returned as agreed to, but if retained beyond that period, then it should be returned with interest. This principle equally applies to the public bodies, Govt. Institutions who under the guise of the public laws recover people's moneys, later discovered to be erroneous levies, then they must return the same and at the same time' compensate the citizen for the unauhorised use of his money. A similar situation has arisen in the present application.

(2.) The facts being admitted need not be debated. The applicant M/s Redihot Electricals are manufacturers of domestic electrical appliances. These electrical applicances are chargeable to excise duty under tariff item No. 33-C. Ad valorem excise duty is chargeable on the value of appliances and the same is to be determined under Section 4 (a) of the Central Excise and Salt Act, 1944.

(3.) The applicant had filed their list of prices of the various appliances with the excise authorities. That list stands approved. The goods were being cleared on payment of excise duty as per the approved list. It appears that on 3rd of December, 1974 two demand notices were issued to the applicant, under Rule 10 of the Central Excise Rules, 1944. The case of the excise authorities was that the excise duty was not payable on the wholesale price received by the applicant from its buyers but was payable on the price on which the goods manufactured by the applicants were sold by its buyers. The applicants contested the demand notices by taking numerous pleas but without success. In appeal, the appellate authority held that :-