R. C. Lahoti, J. - (1.) C. A. No. 6990/99 (arising out of S.L.P. (C) No. 12722/87)
(2.) Leave granted.
(3.) The appellants manufacture and sell asbestos cement products such as sheets (corrugated or plain), pressure pipes, couplings etc. and these products require cement and asbestos fibre as raw materials and both the items consumed as raw materials as also the finished products manufactured by the appellants are all excisable commodities under different tariff items. Asbestos fibre is covered by Tariff Item 22-F. Cement is covered by Tariff Item 23. The finished products manufactured by the appellants are excisable under Tariff Item 23-C. In respect of cement and asbestos fibre obtained from outside excise duties were duly paid under the relevant tariff Items 23 and 22F. In respect of imported asbestos additional duty, i.e., countervailing duty equivalent to excise duty was paid. The finished products of the appellants were not exempt from payment of excise duty leviable thereon nor were they chargeable to nil rate of duty. The appellants claimed the benefit of pro forma credit procedure by seeking credit for the payment of duty paid on the inputs as against the duty payable on the finished products and sought for permission of the Assistant Collector of Central Excise, Hyderabad under Rule 56A of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Rules') framed under the provisions of the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944. The Assistant Collector refused to grant such permission. An appeal preferred before the Collector of Central Excise, Hyderabad failed. The appellants challenged both the orders before the High Court of Andhra Pradesh by filing writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution which also has been dismissed. The decision of the High Court under appeal is reported as (1987) 32 ELT 28 (AP). The High Court has for itself analysed and examined the provisions of Rule 56A. The High Court has also cited in its support a Dvision Bench decision of the High Court of Gujarat in Digvijay Cement Company Limited v. Union of India, (1986) 25 ELT 879. The aggrieved appellants have filed this special leave petition.;