PREM CABLES PVT LTD Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner by this writ petition has challenged order Annexures 3, 5 and 7 and has further prayed that Clause 3 of Notification No. 114/72, dated 1st April, 1972 and Clause 4 of the Notification No. 52/68 dated 23rd March, 1968 may not be made applicable to A.C.S.R. conductors size 6/1/1.96 mm supplied by the petitioner to the Director General, Supplies and Disposals and Clauses 2 and 3. of the above notifications respectively may be made applicable to the petitioner.

(2.) THE petitioner is a private limited company registered under the Indian Companies Act, 1956 and having its registered office at Pipalia Kalan, District Pali (Rajasthan). The petitioner got licence for the manufacture of all aluminium conductors (A.A.C.) and aluminium conductor steel reinforced (A.C.S.R.) conductors chargeable with duty under tariff item No. 33B(ii) of the Schedule attached to the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944 (hereinafter referred to as the Act of 1944). The petitioner, manufactured all aluminium conductors and aluminium conductor steel reinforced conductors in accordance with the specifications given in purchase orders placed by the State Electricity Boards and Government and Semi -Government undertakings including Director General, Supplies and Disposals (D.G.S. and D.). These items are normally used for transmission and distribution of electric energy. These items A.A.C. and A.C.S.R. are chargeable with excise duty ad valorem under Item 33B(ii) of the Schedule to the Act of 1944. The Government of India fixed the tariff value for A.A.C. and A.C.S.R. conductors at the rate of Rs. 7.50 and Rs. 6.25 per kg. respectively by the Notification No. 114/72, dated 1st April, 1972. This tariff rate was fixed by the Government of India under Clause 22 of Notification No. 114/72, dated 1st April, 1972, Clause 3 of Notification No. 52/68, dated 23rd March, 1968 is applicable for all A.A.C. and A.C.S.R. conductors irrespective of any specifications which the purchasers may give in their order. The petitioner manufactured these items and they were charged with the tariff value fixed by the Central Government under Clause 3 and Clause 2 of Notifications No. 52/68 and 111/72 respectively. The petitioner supplied aluminium conductor steel reinforced conductors to Director General, Supplies and Disposals, New Delhi, size 6/l/1.96mm conforming to Indian Telegraph Department specification paying central excise duty at 5 % of the tariff value fixed for A.C.S.R. conductors under Clause 3 of the Notification No. 114/72. The aforesaid goods were cleared from the petitioner's factory as usual on payment of excise duty on the basis of the tariff values fixed under the said notifications. A show cause notice was issued by the Superintendent, Central Excise, Pali on 28th December, 1972 calling upon the petitioner to show cause why differential duty should not be demanded from the petitioner, vide Annexure 1. The petitioner submitted a reply to the show cause notice. The Assistant Collector, Customs and Central Excise, Jodhpur, by his order dated 20th April, 1974 did not accept the submissions made on behalf of the petitioner and directed that the payment of differential duties amounting to Rs. 15,205.27 may be paid. Aggrieved against this order the petitioner preferred an appeal before the Appellate Collector, Customs and Central Excise, New Delhi. The Appellate Collector, after hearing the petitioner dismissed the appeal by the order dated 1/4.9.1975 (Annexure 5). Aggrieved against the order dated 1/4.9.1975 the petitioner preferred a revision petition before the joint Secretary, Government of India, Ministry of Finance (Department of Revenue and Insurance), New Delhi, who in his turn dismissed the revision petition and upheld the order of the Appellate Collector. Aggrieved against the order of the joint Secretary dated 16th December, 1975 the petitioner has filed the present writ petition challenging the differential amount of duty being charged from the petitioner.

(3.) THE learned counsel for the petitioner submits that A.C.S.R. conductors were supplied to the Indian Telegraph Department through Director General, Supplies and Disposals, New Delhi according to Indian specification. It is further submitted that the conductors were manufactured according to Indian Telegraph Department specification, which confirms to Indian Standard Specification No. 398/1961. Thus, according to learned counsel for the petitioner, he will not be covered by Item No. 4 of Notification No. 52/68 and Item No. 3 of Notification No. 114/72, but he will be covered by the Item No. 3 of Notification No. 52/68 and Item No. 2 of Notification No. 114/72 and duties chargeable at the rate of Rs. 7.5 and 6.25 per kg. respectively. As against this Mr. Joshi appearing for the respondents submits that this is essentially a question of fact and all the three Courts below have taken the view that the petitioner is covered by clause 4 of the aforesaid notification and the authorities have rightly charged the differential amount of duties from the petitioner and this finding does not warrant any interference by this Court.