1980 (6) TMI 32 - HC - Central Excise

Summary

Issues:
1. Validity of the order passed by the Assistant Collector of Central Excise refusing to approve price lists submitted by the petitioners.
2. Interpretation of Section 4 of the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944 regarding the determination of wholesale cash price.
3. Applicability of previous judgments by the Supreme Court and the High Court in similar excise duty matters.

Detailed Analysis:
Issue 1:
The petitioners, engaged in manufacturing electric lamps and other components, sought a writ of certiorari to quash the order by the Assistant Collector of Central Excise refusing to approve their price lists submitted in May 1975. They also requested a writ of mandamus to direct the Union of India and the Assistant Collector to withdraw the impugned order, allow clearance of products based on correct price lists, and refund the excess excise duty paid.

Issue 2:
The petitioners, initially unaware of the correct legal position, had included post-manufacturing expenses and profits in their price lists. However, after a Supreme Court judgment in 1972 clarified that excise duty should be based on manufacturing cost and profits, the petitioners submitted revised price lists excluding post-manufacturing costs. The Assistant Collector rejected these revised lists, leading to the present dispute.

Issue 3:
The petitioners argued that the Assistant Collector's orders were erroneous and contrary to legal precedent set by the Supreme Court and previous High Court decisions. These judgments emphasized that excise duty should be levied based on manufacturing costs and profits, excluding post-manufacturing expenses. The High Court, following these precedents, directed the respondents to investigate and approve the correct assessable values in the price lists within a specified timeframe.

The High Court ultimately granted the petitioners' request to quash the Assistant Collector's order and directed the refund of excess excise duty collected. The judgment highlighted the importance of determining excise duty based on manufacturing costs and profits, as established by previous legal decisions.