TRIBENI TISSUES LTD. Vs. CEGAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In this writ petition the petitioner has prayed for issuance of a writ in the nature of prohibition prohibiting the respondents from giving any effect or acting in terms of or taking any steps pursuant to the order bearing No. 212/83 -C of the Tribunal and from giving effect to or acting in terms of or taking any steps in terms of the notice bearing Nos. V -14(15)72 -CE/WB/75/Pt.II/15680 -C dated 24th August, 1983 issued by the Collector, Central Excise, West Bengal, Calcutta, being Annexure 'I' to the petition, with a further prayer on the same count for issuance of a writ of prohibition prohibiting the respondents from charging, demanding or realising any excise duty on precipitated chalk manufactured by the Company or to be sold, used or to be used by the Company. There is also a prayer for a further writ of mandamus directing the respondents to refund and restore to the petitioner all excise duties so far realised on precipitated chalk sold by the company and to refrain from charging, demanding or realising any excise duty on such chalk produced and sold or to be produced and sold by the company.

(2.) On the factual score it appears that the Collector of Central Excise and Customs, West Bengal, Calcutta had decided that 1448,6 tonnes precipitated chalk manufactured and sold by the petitioner herein during the period January, 1961 to December, 1963, 3960 tonnes between January, 1964 to September, 1974 and 59 tonnes during the period October, 1974 to September, 1975, should be levied to duty under Item 14(1)(5) of the Central Excise Tariff. By its order dated 30th June, 1979 the Board, however, remanded the case to the Collector to take a fresh decision after making detailed enquiries about the use to which the precipitated chalk was put.

(3.) Subsequently, however, by process of time the matter came up before the Customs Excise and Gold (Control) Appellate Tribunal (CEGAT), New Delhi, Special Bench 'C wherein the Tribunal, however, remanded the matter back to the Collector of Central Excise with the observation as follows: