- (1.) THESE 15 special appeals before us arise out of a common judgment dated May 6, 1982, passed by a learned Single Judge, by which he allowed 15 writ petitions, which have given rise to these appeals and declared that acrylic plastic sheets/tubes and plastic bangles do not attract excise duty under Central Excise Tariff ('the Tariff') Item No. 15A(2), of the First Schedule to the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944 (No. 1 of 1944) (for short 'the Act'), and the appellants, who were non -petitioners in the writ petitions, were restrained from levying excise duty on the aforesaid products.
(2.) THE question involved in these special appeals is common and so, they were heard together and we consider it proper to dispose of them by a common order. The facts leading to these appeals are substantially the same and, therefore, we shall notice the facts in D.B. Civil Special Appeal No. 572/82 : Union of India and Ors. v. Raish Plastics. This appeal has arisen out of S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 1543/80 [1983 (12) ELT 92 (Raj.)]. The petitioner -respondent manufactures acrylic plastic sheets, flat or round, and plastic bangles, through cylindrical process. While manufacturing the aforesaid articles, the petitioner -respondent uses regenerated monomer manufactured in its own factory out of plastic scraps and also purchases regenerated monomer from the market. The petitioner -respondent has stated in the writ petition that the monomer virgin is purchased by it from Polymer Corporation of Gujarat Ltd., Baroda. The petitioner -respondent has been enjoying exemption from Central Excise Duty and were not required to obtain any licence. The manufacturers of the plastic bangles were enjoying this exemption from September, 1973 when the original Notification No. 38/73 -C.E. dated March 1, 1973 was amended by Notification No. 174/73 -C.E., dated September 8, 1973, whereby exemption was granted to acrylic sheets, if produced out of monomer. The petitioner -respondent claims its products wholly exempt from payment of the Central Excise Duty. The Superintendent, Central Excise, Range, Jodhpur, directed the petitioner -respondent not to sell its products manufactured out of monomer virgin till orders of the Central Excise Department. Such a direction was also given to the manufacturers of A.P. Bangles of Jodhpur. Representation was made through Association, namely the Plastic Industries Association. The office -bearers of the Association met the Assistant Collector, Central Excise, Range, Jodhpur on July 9, 1980 and explained the entire process of manufacture to him. It is said that the Assistant Collector visited the factory of M/s. Ambica Plastic, Pratap Nagar, Jodhpur, and the manufacturing process was shown to him. However, the Superintendent, Central Excise, Range, Jodhpur sent letter Annexure 1 dated July 15, 1980 to the President, Plastic Bangles Association, Jodhpur. The letter reads as under : - 'CENTRAL EXCISE RANGE JODHPUR No. G/ -6/21/79/9233 Dated 15 -7 -1980.To The President, Plastics Bangles Association, Choorigar Bazar, Jodhpur. Dear Sir, Sub : Central Excise, Excisability of A.P. tubes - regarding. The A.P. tubes/bangles manufactured out of M.M. Monomer virgin is excisable. The regenerated monomer brought from outside is also treated at par with virgin M.M. Monomer. You are, therefore, requested to advise all the Association's members, manufacturing the said goods, should obtain Central Excise licence IMMEDIATELY. Please also note that manufacture and clearance of the said goods should be carried on under Central Excise Rules, 1944. Yours faithfully Sd/ - Kartarchand (KARTAR CHAND) 15 -7 -1980' A perusal of this letter shows that the petitioners, who are respondents in these appeals, were required to obtain central excise licence and they were informed that A.P. tubes/bangles manufactured out of monomer virgin are excisable and the same is the position of the regenerated monomer brought from outside. The petitioners filed the writ petitions, out of which these appeals have arisen challenging the levy of excise duty on A.P. sheets, tubes and bangles manufactured by them out of monomer virgin as well as regenerated, whether manufactured by them or purchased by them from outside. In all the writ petitions, the petitioner -respondents have prayed that the letter Annexure 1 dated July 15, 1980 may be quashed and the appellants (non -petitioners in the writ -petitions) may be restrained from enforcing the same against them.
(3.) THE writ petition was contested by the appellants. It was stated in the reply that the petitioners -respondents are engaged in the manufacture of A.P. bangles only, but they first manufacture A.P. bangles tubes made of plastic material manufactured out of virgin or regenerated monomer. These A.P. bangles tubes are then cut in the shape of bangles of various thickness according to the requirements of the customers. The defence taken was that the A.P. bangles tubes are articles made of plastic falling under Tariff Item No. 15A(2) of the First Schedule to the Act. In the reply, the respondents stated the details of manufacturing process. It was further stated that the petitioner -respondents cannot claim any exemption under Notification No. 38/73 dated March 1, 1973, as amended by Notification No. 174/73 dated September 6, 1973 and further it was stated that the exemption contained in Notification No. 38/73 as amended, is applicable to A.P. sheets and not to A.P. Bangles tubes and as the petitioner -respondents manufacture A.P. bangles tubes, they are liable to payment of appropriate duty right from 1975. It will be clear from the defence taken by the appellants in the reply to the writ petitions that according to them, the petitioner -respondents cannot claim exemption of their products both under Tariff Item No. 15A(2) and Notification No. 38/73 as amended by Notification No. 174/73.;