SATISH CHANDRA, C.J. - (1.) THIS group of 19 writ petition has been filed by cold storage owners. The facts and the points of law raised in each are the same. We shall take the facts from Civil Miscellaneous Writ No. 450 of 1976. In this case, the petitioner installed and assembled the cold storage plant in 1965. Part of the plant consisted of erecting locally what an; called cooling coils and condensers. Generally cooling coils and containers contain a very long length of pipes made in a particular shape. The petitioner, however bought pipes of various lengths, erected them one after the other and joined one with the other with an 'U' shape bend. These bends were welded. The result was that the various pipes constituted an unit in designing the plant. This part of the plant was necessary in order to pass the cooling gas through it and thereby cool the chambers of the storage. The petitioner bought the pipes and the bends from the market and got them placed at the factory site and got them welded himself.
(2.) THE petitioner received a notice dated April 22, 1970, from the Superintendent, Central Excise stating that the petitioner had manufactured parts of refrigerating and airconditioning machinery and appliances covered by Item No. 29A (3) of the First Schedule to the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944, namely, condensers and cooling coils. On the estimated value of these coils and condensers a duty in the, sum of Rs. 32,000/ - was payable which the petitioner was required to pay or to' show cause. The petitioner filed objections which were dismissed by the Assistant Collector of Central Excise by an order dated June 22, 1973. The petitioner filed an appeal. The Appellate Collector of Central Excise and Customs dismissed the appeal on June 29, 1976. The petitioner then filed a revision before the Central Government. The same was pending when the present writ petition was filed.
(3.) SIMILAR was the case with other petitioners. They also went up in appeal and then in revision. In some of those cases the revision was decided by the .Govt. of India. It was held that the conglomeration of pipes manufactured by -the petitioner constitutes manufacture of a cooling coil as used in refrigeration technology. The arrangement of coils in the manner done by the petitioner answered the term 'Cooling coils and condensers' adequately. It was also held that it was not necessary that for a person to be licenced he should be in the trade or profession of manufacture of component parts of regrigerating machinery. The petitioner did manufacture these parts, to carry on the business of cold storage. It was also found that the plea based upon the tariff advice relating to the entire refrigeration plant being assembled at site was not maintainable. Tariff advice was not applicable to components or parts of such refrigeration unit. The parts namely, the cooling coils and condensers erected by the petitioner in his own cold storage were liable to duty under Item No. 29A (3) of the Central Excise and Salt Act, 1944. The judgment of the Gujarat High Court relied upon by the petitioner was held distinguishable. On these findings the revision dismissed.;