P.Chakravartti, C.J. - (1.) The controversy in this appeal is as to whether Section 8(1)(a) of the Coal Mines (Conservation and Safety) Act, 1952, so far us it purports to impose a duty of excise on all coal raised and despatched from collieries in India, is a valid piece of legislation and even if it be valid, whether it applies to so much of the coal raised from the appellant's colliery as is consumed in its own power house. Logically, the second question should come first, because if the section does not apply to the appellant's colliery, it is immaterial to the appellant whether the section is valid or not. I shall, however, deal with the two points in the order in which they were argued.
(2.) The controversy has arisen in the following way: The appellant, the Aluminium Corporation of India Ltd., is a large concern, manufacturing aluminium and it has its factory at Jaykaynagar in the district of Burdwan. The plants in the factory are driven by electricity, for the supply of which the factory has its own power house. For feeding the power house, coal is required. The appellant has provided itself with a source for getting the coal by taking a lease of a colliery which is situated within the boundaries of the factory. Thus, the factory, the power house and the colliery are all situated within the same compound and all are owned by the appellant as parts of a single industrial unit.
(3.) The colliery has an average annual output of 55,000 to 70,000 tons of coal. Of that quantity, the bulk is consumed in the power house for generation of the electricity used in the factory for the production of aluminium. The small remainder is sold to railway and other parties. A tabular statement filed by the appellant for five years shows that, on the average, about 50000 tons of coal were consumed in the power house and about 13000 tons were sold to third parties.;