- (1.) Heard the learned Counsel for the parties
(2.) While entertaining the writ petition, the Division Bench of this Court has passed the following order on 13-11- 2006 : "The dispute in this writ petition relates to refund of excise duty. The appellant claims to have purchased a Maruti Esteem Car of AX model manufactured by the Maruti Udhyog Limited. Claiming to be a physically handicapped person suffering from Post Polio Palsy, he claimed refund of the Excise duty paid on purchase of the vehicle in terms of Exemption Notification No. 66. Copy of the said notification has been enclosed as Schedule A to the writ petition. In terms of entry 226, sale of cars for physically handicapped persons are exempted from excise duty. The claim of the petitioner however was rejected on the ground that Maruti Udhyog Limited had lodged similar claim. The claim of Maruti Udhyog Limited however was rejected vide Annex. 13 on the two fold ground, namely, that the certificate in respect of the disability was issued two months after and the same was not in consonance with condition No. 43 of notification No. 3/2001 and secondly that the disability of petitioner is in the right lower limb whereas the disability should be in the left limb. Having stated these basic facts, we call upon the respondents to file reply. If the respondents fail to convince the Court that their stand was bona fide and in accordance with the relevant circular of the. department, we may allow the writ pettlon with costs. Put up on 11-12-2006 as prayed for."
(3.) Having heard the learned Counsel for the parties, we are now f inally disposing of this matter by this judgment.;