NATIONAL LEATHERCLOTH MANUFACTURING CO Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BASED upon the decision of this Court in the case of Bombay Tyre International v. Union of India reported in 1979 (4) E. L. T. (]625), the Petitioners had filed the present petition in the year 1981, inter alia, challenging the constitutional validity of new Section 4 of the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944, and also the orders passed by their Excise authorities declining to exclude certain expenses claimed as post-manufacturing expenses from the assessable value while approving the classification list of the petitioners. The petitioners have claimed refund of Excise duty amounting to Rs. 40,18,805. 60 ps. with 18% interest in respect of the goods cleared by them during the period from 12th November, 1977 to 12th November, 1980, on the ground that certain post-manufacturing expenses have been erroneously included in the assessable value and excise duty has been erroneously paid by them.

(2.) DURING the pendency of the petition the Respondents were directed by this Court to deposit certain amount in Court and the petitioners were permitted to withdraw that amount on furnishing security. Accordingly the Respondents had deposited the amount and the Petitioners had withdrawn the same by furnishing security. Later on, the said order was modified and the Petitioners were directed to bring back the amount withdrawn by them and the Respondents were directed to adjudicate the matter afresh in accordance with the decision of the Apex Court in the case of Union of India v. Bombay Tyre International Limited reported in 1983 (14) E. L. T. 1896. Since the Apex Court in the case of Bombay Tyre International (supra) has upheld the constitutional validity of new Section 4 of the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944 the only issue to be determined by the Excise authorities was regarding the permissibility of certain deductions as post-manufacturing expenses as per the guidelines laid down by the Apex Court in the Bombay Tyre International's case (supra ).

(3.) IN the light of order passed by this Court, the matter was adjudicated afresh by the Excise authorities after giving personal hearing to the Petitioners and by an order dated 12th April, 1984 the Assistant Commissioner of Central Excise, Bombay-II rejected the refund claim of the Petitioners as time-barred and disallowed the deduction claimed by the Petitioners as post-manufacturing expenses under different heads. The petition has been amended to challenge the said order dated 12th April, 1984.