BAJAJ TEMPO LIMITED Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS order shall also govern the disposal of the Connected Writ Petitions particularised as M. P. No. 1350/88 (National Steel Industries ltd. v. The Collector of Customs and Central Excise and Ors.) M. P. No. 1101 /88 (Indore Steel and Iron Mills Ltd. v. Union of India and Ors.), M. P. No. 933/90 (Shree Synthetic Ltd. v. Union of India and Ors.), M. P. No. 1076/90 (STI Biplus Tubing (India) Ltd. v. Union of India and Ors.), and M. P. No. 932/90 (Reliance Ispat Industries Ltd. v. Union of India and Ors. ).

(2.) BRIEFLY stated the facts of these petitions are that the petitioners constructed shed with the aid of duty-paid product and material. The shed is built by trusses, columns, girders, purlins, and other articles. The respondents felt that this construction is not fabrication of certain articles as noted above, but manufacture of the said article. They held that the process of subjecting the plates, channels and angles through process of cutting, drilling and welding amounted to "manufacture" and the material used was goods liable to central excise duty. The Respondent (Additional Collector) in the aforesaid view of the matter, issued the show cause notice to the petitioner as to why the excise duty should not be recovered under Rule 9 (2) of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 read with Section 11a of the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944 and why a penalty under Rules 9 (2), 52a (5), 173 (2) and 226 of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 be not imposed upon the petitioner on the ground of contravention of the aforesaid provisions of Rules. Aggrieved by such show cause notices in all the petitions, the petitioners have filed this writ petition dubbing the aforesaid notices as without authority of law and without jurisdiction.

(3.) THE respondents have filed reply to the show cause notices opposing the petition and treated the same as return after admission of this petition subsequent to the show cause notice.