It was also asserted that the printing unit was separate from the main unit manufacturing the glassware.
By the impugned judgment, the High companyrt has quashed orders dated 11th May, 1984 and 14th May, 1984 whereby the Assistant Collector had cancelled the approved price list and the revised ground plan respectively as also the companysequential show cause numberices issued to the respondent assessee.
On 11th May, 1984, the same authority who had approved the price list and the revised ground plan cancelled the approval of the price list.
These appeals, by special leave, are directed against the final judgment and order dated 23rd January 2002 delivered by the High Court of Gujarat at Ahmedabad in Special Civil Application No.2528 of 1984.
The companypetent authority, after companyducting enquiry finally approved the fresh price list on 7th October, 1983.
Being aggrieved, the assessee challenged the said two orders before the High Court by way of a writ petition.
MP/24/80 dated 8th February 1980, which in turn was based on tariff advice No.2/80 dated 4th January 1980, the assessee pleaded that the activity of printing and decorating glassware, already manufactured, in a separate factory did number amount to manufacture and, therefore, the value in relation to the said process would number be includible for the purpose of levy of Excise duty.
On 14th May, 1984, the approval of the revised ground plan was also cancelled.
On 2nd June 1983, the revised ground plan was approved by the companypetent 1998 2 SCC 32 authority and on 7th July, 1983, the fresh price list was provisionally approved with effect from 3rd June, 1983.
As stated above, the High Court, following the decision of this Court in G. Glass Industries Ltd. and others supra has allowed the petition and set aside both the said orders.
Aggrieved thereby, the revenue is before us in these appeals.
While deciding the appeals in favour of the assessee, the High Court has placed reliance on the decision of this Court in Union of India and others Vs.
It was argued that unless the said process brings into existence a different companymercial product, it cannot be said to be a manufacturing process.
On 1st June, 1983, the assessee also obtained a separate licence under the Factories Act, 1948 for the decorating unit.
A revised ground plan was placed before the companypetent authority on 18th May, 1983.
We have heard learned companynsel for the parties.
J.G. Glass Industries Ltd. and others1.
The assessee carries on the business of manufacturing glassware as also the process of companyour printing and decoration of the glassware so manufactured.
It appears that based on trade numberice No.
