2002 Supp 2 SCR 475 The following Order of the Court was delivered In these appeals, the short question that arise for companysideration is whether plastic body, a part of Electro Mosquito Repellant, and Fragrant Mat are chargeable to excise duty under Clause 5 f of Notification 16086 CE dated March I, 1986 and Sub Heading 3307.49, respectively, of the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985.
Show cause numberices were issued to the appellants under Section 11 A of the Central Excise Act, 1944 for short, the Excise Act by the Superintendent Central Excise Range II, Pithampur, raising demand of excise duty on plastic body of Electro Mosquito Repellant for short, E.M.R. which falls within Domestic electrical appliances classifiable under Sub Heading 85.16 of the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985 for short, the Tariff Act and on Fragrant mat.
Against the judgment and order of the High Court dated March 24,1994, allowing in the writ petitions, the aforesaid two appeals, being Civil Appeal Nos.
However, the respondent in Civil Appeal No.
182 of 1995 and 108 of 1995, are filed by the Revenue.
Civil Appeal No.
The Collector of Customs and Central Excise, Indore.
The High Court, in writ petitions, held that the plastic body is number goods within the meaning of the Tariff Act and, therefore, it is number liable to excise duty and that the Fragrant Mat, did number answer the description of Sub Heading 3307.49 and, therefore, it quashed the show cause numberices.
182 of 1995 and 108 of 1995 filed writ petitions, under Article 226 of the Constitution, before the High Court of Madhya Pradesh challenging the validity of the show cause numberices.
companyfirmed the demand which was assailed before Customs, Excise and Gold companytrol Appellate Tribunal in appeal.
1649 of 1996 filed reply before the companycerned authorities.
The respondents in Civil Appeal Nos.
