BOMBAY WIRE ROPES LTD Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By this petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioners are challenging the legality of the order dated October 24, 1977 passed by Shri D. G. Ahire, Assistant Collector of Central Excise, Bombay Division XIII, directing that the two modified Polyvinyl Acetate Synthetic Resin Predicts viz. Surfasol S-5 and Surfasol S-6 should be classified as Synthetic Resins falling under Tariff item 15A(1)(ii) and charged to duty at 40% ad valorem with effect from June 18, 1977.

(2.) The petitioners filed with the Superintendent, I/C Range No. V, Thane, a classification list in respect of these two items claiming that the products should be covered by Tariff Item 68 as accepted by the Department prior to June 18, 1977. The Assistant Collector proceeded to charge the duty on the basis of Tariff Item No. 15-A(1)(ii) in view of the Budgetary changes vide Finance Bill No. 2 of 1977 effective from June 18, 1977. The Assistant Collector felt that the revision of Tariff Entry No. 15-A widens the definition of Synthetic Resin to cover all modified forms of Synthetic Resins.

(3.) The petitioners filed this petition in this Court on January 19, 1978 and the petition was duly admitted and interim orders were passed on petitioners' furnishing Bank guarantee. The interim order was passed in terms of the Minutes filed by the parties on March 13, 1978. The petitioners have furnished several Bank guarantees in pursuance of this order and all those guarantees are still outstanding. The petitioners, during the tendency of this petition, have filed an appeal against the impugned order before the Appellate Collector of Central Excise and Customs, and the appeal was dismissed by an order dated September 9, 1979 on the ground that the petition is pending in the High Court and the orders of the High Court would supersede whatever order the Appellate Authority would pass in the appeal. Shri Hidayatullah applies for amendment of the petition and desires to challenge the order passed by the Appellate Authority on September 9, 1979. As the appellate order was passed during the pendency of the petition, I find no difficulty in granting the amendment as sought by Shri Hidayatullah. Shri Hidayatullah undertakes that the requisite amendment would be carried out within two days.