J. S. VERMA, C. J. - (1.) A short point involved for decision in this petition is, whether the articles manufactured by the petitioner on which excise duty was levied for the first time with effect from 1. 3. 1975, which were lying fully manufactared in the petitioner's stock prior to that date could be subjected to the excise duty levied from 1. 3. 1975 in view of para 5 of the Trade notice No. 17-CE/75 (I6-Visc) dated 1. 3. 1975 issued by the Central Excise Collectorate, Delhi? Para 5 of the aforesaid notice reads as under: "stocks of the articles mentioned in para 4 above at midnight of 28th February/1st March, 1975, in fully manufactured condition, even if lying within the precincts of the producing factory will be eligible for duty free clearance. Goods will not be considered as fully manufactured unless at mid night of 28th February/1st March, 1975, they are ready for delivery. " It has been held by the Assistant Collector, Central Excise & Customs, Ajmer vide his order (Annexure V) dated 12-2-1976 that the petitioner is liable for payment of excise duty on these articles and this view has been affirmed on appeal by the Appellate Collector vide order (Annexure VII) dated 31. 7. 1976, and the petitioner's revision to the Central Government has also been dismissed by the order dated 13. 10. 1977 (Annexure X ). Hence this petition.
(2.) THE finding given by the Assistant Collector which has been affirmed throughout is that the articles described as pre-budget stock were held by the petitioner on 1-3-1975 in fully manufactured condition so that no part of process of the manufacturing remained to be done at that time and these articles were also duly wrapped in polythene wrappers. It is obvious from this finding that these articles were, therefore, in fully manufactured stage available for being handed over or delivered to the purchaser in their existing condition without anything more required to be done for completing the manufacture. THE view taken by the authorities is that they could be entitled to exemption from the levy of the freshly imposed excise duty only if they were further packed in wooden crates which would have indicated readiness delivery. It is difficult to appreciate or accept this contention. The excise duty is admittedly a duty levied on the manufacture of goods and on any subsequent stage thereof. In the present case, these goods were admittedly fully manufactured prior to the point of time when the excise duty was levied on their manufacture with effect from 1. 3. 1975. The object of para 5 of the above said Trade notice was merely to clarify that such articles which had already been fully manufactured prior to the imposition of the levy for the first time with effect from 1. 3. 1975 even though lying in stock of the manufacturer will not be subjected to imposition since the fully manufactured articles lying in the stock was ready for delivery to the purchaser. This is how the expression, 'ready for delivery" used in para 5 of the Trade notice must be understood. Para 5 specifies only one condition for its application, and that is that the articles should have been fully manufactured prior to imposition of this fresh levy with effect from 1-3-1975. It is not correct to read para 5 as imposing further condition that even though the articles are fully manufactured and, therefore, ready for delivery, they should also be duly packed in wooden crates as held by the authorities. The writ petition has therefore, to be allowed. Consequently the writ petition is allowed. The impugned orders dated 30-6-1977 (Ann. X), dated 31-7-76 (Ann. VII) and dated 12-2-76 (Ann. V) are quashed and it is held that these goods described as pre budget stock of the petitioner lying in its stock on the mid-night of 28-2-75/1-3-75 in fully manufactured condition, are not eligible to the fresh excise duty imposed on such articles only from 1-3-1975. The petitioner would be entitled to refund of the excise duty if any, already paid thereon. The petitioner shall also get costs of Rs. 300/- as counsel fees. .;