LIGHT METAL WORKS Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The controversy in this petition lies in a very narrow compass, and the facts set out hereinafter would make it clear. Petitioner No. 1 is a partnership firm and the other petitioners are the partners. The petitioners purchase duty paid aluminium sheets and the same are cut to required sizes in the square shapes at the first stage. The pieces are further cut on the hand operated shearing machine to convert then into circular shape. Such circular pieces are then put in the spinning machine to get the required shape and thereafter the same are welded for the purpose of manufacture of topes. During the entire process of manufacture of topes, the square shapes or circles are not removed from the factory nor are they marketed.

(2.) Tariff Item No. 27 of the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944 deals with subject of 'aluminium' and Item 27(b) prescribes levy of duty at 50% ad valorem plus Rs. 4000/- per metric tonne on manufacturers of plates, sheets, circles, strips, shapes and sections in any form or size, not otherwise specified. The process of manufacture of topes is liable to duty under Tariff Item 68, which is a residuary item.

(3.) The petitioners claim that as the circles cut out from the aluminium sheets are used in the manufacture of topes, the claim of the department that circles are liable for payment of duty under Tariff Item 27(b) is not correct and the petitioners are not required to follow the procedure under Rule 56-A of the Central Exercise Rules. The petitioners addressed a letter to the Excise Authorities to clarify the position, but having failed to receive any positive response, filed the present petition on August 7, 1982 for a writ of mandamus directing the respondents to grant exemption to the petitioners from following the procedure prescribed under Rule 56-A of the Central Excise Rules, while manufacturing aluminium topes.