T I MILLER Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) INVOKING Art. 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner herein has filed the present writ petition seeking for a Writ of Mandamus to direct the third respondent herein to grant exemption under notification No. 67/83-C.E., dated 1-3-83 to the bulbs importedvideBill of entry No. 47925/4-1-91 to the petitioner herein and consequently to direct the third respondent to refund the sum of Rs. 1, 54, 980/- being the amount of duty deposited by the petitioner and to pass such further or other orders as this Court may deem fit in the facts and circumstances of the case.

(2.) IN support of the writ petition, the petitioner herein has filed an affidavit wherein he has narrated all the facts and circumstances that forced him to file the present writ petition and requested this court to allow the writ petition as prayed for. Per contra, on behalf of the respondent a counter affidavit has been filed rebutting all the material allegations levelled against them one after the other and ultimately they have requested this court to dismiss the writ petition for want of merits.

(3.) FURTHER according to him for the purpose of determining whether a particular bulb was covered under the table specified under notification, the definition as well as the procedure prescribed in the Indian Standard Specification has to be adopted. It is also his case that ISI has given definition/specification only in respect of vaccum/bulbs for automobile use and flash lights and there is no ISI specification for bulbs of less than 25 watts. Consequently in respect of bulbs imported by the petitioner, there is no prescribed definition or procedure for testing by the Indian Standard Specifications, in the absence of any such specification, according to the petitioner the entry in the table has to be made applicable and that therefore the bulbs imported by the petitioner do not fall under entries 1, 2 and 3 and would therefore fall under entry 4 and liable to nil rate of duty. Therefore it is the case of the petitioner that despite the orders of the Collector (Appeals), the matter is still pending with the third respondent who is insisting upon furnishing of details from the Indian Standard Institution.