SANDEEP ROHMETRA Vs. UNION OF INDIA AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioner manufactures Steel Tubular Poles in Industrial Complex at Bari Brahmana, Jammu. Through the medium of the present petition, the petitioner seeks issuance of a writ of certiorari for quashing order dt. 10th April, 2013, issued by the Superintendent, Central Excise Range -III, Jammu, informing the petitioner that the process of manufacture of Steel Tubular Poles was a process which amounted to manufacture according to the Central Excise Act and, therefore, amenable to levy of excise duty. The aforementioned communication, in fact, appeared to be based upon a decision of the CESTAT (Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal) dt. 4.7.2012, arising out of OIA No. 1 -6/CE/Appl/Jal/09 dt. 6.1.2009, titled CCE, J&K, Jammu v/s. M/s. North Sun Enterprises Industrial Estate and others, wherein, relying upon the judgment of the Apex Court in the case of Prachi Industries v/s. Commissioner of Central Excise, Chandigarh, : (2008) 12 SCC 783, the CESTAT held all the manufacturing units amenable to central excise.

(2.) In reply to the aforementioned communication, a reply appears to have been sent by the petitioner dt. 12.4.2013, wherein it was sought to be highlighted that the activity undertaken by the petitioner in its unit for manufacture of steel tubular poles was one which would be covered by the judgment of the Apex Court in the case of Hindustan Poles Corpn. v/s. Commissioner of Central Excise, Calcutta, : (2006) 4 SCC 85, and not by Prachi Industries case supra.

(3.) In response to this letter, the Superintendent, Central Excise Range -III, Jammu, vide his letter dt. 16.4.2013, threatened the petitioner of action under Sec. 14 of the Central Excise Act, 1944, (here -in -after called the Act of 1944) by declaring that the petitioner was only indulging in time gaining tactics.