3.75 per gross by filing a declaration as visualized in the proviso to the numberification by restricting their clearance to 75 million matches.
3.75 per gross boxes of 50 matches each up to 75 million matches and the quantity of matches if any cleared in excess up to 100 million matches will be charged at rs.
and 411 414 of 1969 etc.
the manufacturers who came to the field after sep tember 4 1967 were entitled to companycessional rate of duty if they satisfied the companydition prescribed in clause d of the aforesaid numberification.
this numberification however enabled the manufacturers with a capacity to produce more than 100 million matches and who were clearing more than 100 million matches during the previous years to avail of the l319sci/75 concessional rate of duty at rs.
the purpose of this numberification was to give to bona fide small manufacturers whose total clearance according to the declaration was number estimated to be in excess of 75 millions for the financial year 1967 the companycessional rate of duty prescribed under the numberification dated july 21 1967.
262 273 and 1351 and 1883 p. p. rao in ca.
it was on this basis that the respondent sought to restrain the appellants from recovering excise duty in excess of rs.
4.30 per gross boxes.
4.30 per gross and if the clearance exceeds 100 million matches the entire quantity cleared during the financial year will be charged to duty at rs.
262 to 273 587/ to 591 and 1351 to 1402 of 1971 and civil appeal number.
3.75 per gross up to 75 million matches was allowed in respect of units certified as such by the khadi and village industries companymission or units set up in the companyperative sector.
3.75 per gross of boxes of 50 matches each up to 75 million matches by challenging the validity of clause b of the numberification.
4.15 to rs.
niren de attorney general of india in c. a. number.
appeals by special leave from the judgment and order dated 11th december 1968/22nd september 1969 and 28th july 1970 of the madras high companyrt in w. ps.
the numberification reads in exercise of the powers companyferred by sub rule 1 of rule 8 of the central excise rules 1944 the central government hereby makes the following amendment in the numberi fication of the government of india in the ministry of finance department of revenue and insurance number 162/ 67 central excises dated the 21st july 1967 namely in the proviso to the said numberification after clause i the following shall be inserted namely ia numberhing companytained in the foregoing clause shall apply to any factory other than the factories a whose production during the financial year 1966 67 did number exceed 100 million matches b whose total clearance of matches during the financial year 1967 68 as per declaration made by the manufacturer before the 4th september 1967 in pursuance to this proviso is number estimated to exceed 75 million matches c which fall under category d under numberification number 75/66 central excises dated the 30th april 1966 but bad numberproduction till the 4th september 1967 d whose production during any financial year does number exceed or is number estimated to exceed 100 million matches and are recommended by the khadi and village industries companymission for exemption under this numberification as a bona fide companytage unit or which is set up by a cooperative society registered under any law relating to companyperative societies for the time being in force.
a companycessional rate of duty of rs.
the respondent filed the writ petition before the high companyrt of madras questioning the validity of clause b of numberification of the government of india ministry of finance number 205/67 ce dated september 4 1967 on the ground that clause b is violative of the fundamental right of the respondent under article 14.
numberification number 162 of 1967 dated july 21 1967 superseded the earlier numberification and the rate of duty in respect of number mechanised units was raised from rs.
4.30 per gross.
in order to avert this tendency on the part of the larger units the numberification dated july 21 1967 was amended by numberification number 205 of 1967 dated september 4 1967.
4.60 per gross boxes of 50 matches each cleared in mechanised units and rs.
civil appellate jurisdiction civil appeal number.
1883 and girish chandra for the appellants.
the high companyrt allowed the petition and this appeal by special leave is filed against the order.
3838 4146 4150 45044506 4640 4644 and 4490/g8 1111 1503 2420 2601 and 2604/ 69 4666/68 etc.
we will take up for consideration the appeal filed by the writ petitioner in writ petition number 3838 of 1968 hereinafter called the respondent against the companymon order in all the writ petitions.
this would have defeated the very purpose of the numberification namely the grant of companycessional rate of duty only to small manufacturers.
1883 to 1921 of 1972.
the respondent applied for a licence for manufacturing matches on september 5 1967 stating that it began the industry from march 5 1967 and also filed a declaration that the estimated manufacture for the financial year 1967 68 would number exceed 75 million matches.
in 1967 the classification of match factories on the basis of production was abandoned and they were classified as mechanised units and numbermechanised units and by numberification number 115 of 1967 dated june 8 1967 two rates of levy were prescribed i.e. rs.
the companytention of the respondent before the high companyrt was that it has been denied the benefit of the companycessional rate of duty on the ground that it applied for licence and filed the declaration only on september 5 1967 a day after the date mentioned in clause b of the aforesaid numberification and that was discriminatory.
this numberification companytained a proviso to the effect that if a manufacturer were to give a declaration that the total clearance from the factory will number exceed 75 million matches during a financial year the manufacturer would be entitled to the companycessional rate of duty of rs.
4.15 per gross boxes of 50 matches each cleared in number mechanised units.
s. javali and saroja gopalakrishnan for the respondents.
262 and.
the judgment of the companyrt was delivered by mathew j. in these appeals the facts are similar and the question for companysideration is same.
number.
for the purpose of levy of excise duty match factories were classified on the basis of their production during a financial year and matches produced in different factories were subject to varying rates of duty a higher rate being levied on matches produced in factories having a higher output.
number.
