1990 (11) TMI 146 - HC - Central Excise

Summary

Issues:
1. Entitlement to total exemption of excise duty on fire works.
2. Orders of detention of goods manufactured.
3. Violation of condition for exemption - use of power in manufacturing process.
4. Ancillary relief of clearing goods without excise duty.
5. Adjudication of demands and appeals.
6. Quashing of orders and passing of show cause notices.
7. Tenability of show cause notices and remedies available in law.

Analysis:

Issue 1: Entitlement to total exemption of excise duty on fire works
The judgment addressed the controversy of whether the petitioners are entitled to total exemption of levy of excise duty on fire works manufactured by them. The petitioners sought exemption until the withdrawal of the notification. The court dismissed the Writ Petitions as the investigation concluded with no evidence of violation of the exemption condition, and the detained goods were released.

Issue 2: Orders of detention of goods manufactured
The judgment discussed the orders of detention of goods manufactured by the petitioners during the exemption period. It was noted that in some cases, the goods were released after investigations, while in others, appeals were pending or dismissed. The court refrained from adjudicating the controversy in writ jurisdiction, allowing the concerned authorities to pass orders on merits.

Issue 3: Violation of condition for exemption - use of power in manufacturing process
The controversy revolved around whether the petitioners violated the condition for exemption by using power in the manufacturing process. The court emphasized that the departmental authorities should adjudicate on these matters, especially when investigations were completed, and orders of adjudication were pending.

Issue 4: Ancillary relief of clearing goods without excise duty
Some petitioners sought ancillary relief to clear goods without payment of excise duty. The judgment highlighted that the authorities should pass adjudication orders on merits, giving the petitioners an opportunity to present their case before taking any further action.

Issue 5: Adjudication of demands and appeals
The judgment mentioned cases where adjudications were over, demands were confirmed, and appeals were either pending or dismissed. It directed the authorities to consider the questions involved and pass orders without being influenced by the dismissal of the writ petitions.

Issue 6: Quashing of orders and passing of show cause notices
Certain petitioners challenged orders of detention and sought directions to pass orders on show cause notices. The court emphasized that the authorities should adjudicate on the matters on merits and allow the petitioners to present their arguments before making any decisions.

Issue 7: Tenability of show cause notices and remedies available in law
In cases where show cause notices were challenged, the judgment dismissed the petitions, advising the petitioners to seek remedies available in law after orders of adjudication were passed. It reiterated the importance of giving the petitioners an opportunity to present their arguments before final decisions were made.