A.N.Verma, J. - (1.) This petition is primarily directed against a show cause notice dated 6-10-1986 issued by the Assistant Collector, Central Excise, Allahabad, calling upon the petitioner to show cause why the refund claim submitted by them for the refund of Rs. 28,31,472.73 may not be rejected. As the parties have exchanged affidavits the petition is being disposed of finally at the stage of admission with the consent of counsel for the parties.
(2.) The facts relevant for the disposal of the petition lie within a narrow compass and there is not much dispute between the parties on those facts. They may be briefly summarised thus.
(3.) The petitioner, a public limited company, carries on the business of manufacturing and selling torches, dry cell batteries and miniature bulbs, etc. On the goods manufactured by it, it pays excise duty under the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944. On March 28, 1977 it submitted a refund claim in respect of the duty stated to have been paid in excess on electric batteries during the period 12-7-1968 to 30-9-1975. The basis of the claim alleged was that under a mistake of law the petitioners had included post manufacturing costs in the assessable value calculated under Section 4 (old) of the aforesaid Act. Legally post manufacturing costs, it was contended, were liable to be excluded in determining the assessable value of the concerned item. The Assistant Collec- appeal on 30-3-1979 before the Appellate Collector, Central Excise, New Delhi who by his order dated 3-4-1982 allowed the appeal and modified the order passed by the Assistant Collector with certain directions which, as we will presently demonstrate, have a vital bearing on the controversy raised before use are, therefore, being extracted here : "In the circumstances, I consider that the proper course would be to allow the benefit in respect of the period of three years from the date of finalization of respective assessments. This benefit would, however, accrue only if the applicants were able to show to the satisfaction of the Collector that the post-manufacturing elements indicated by them were distinctly identifiable and could be shown to have been actually incurred. Assistant Collector's order is modified accordingly. Messrs. Geep Flashlight Industries Ltd., Sd/- S K Bhatnagar28 South Rd Allahabad Appellate Collector";