The agreements with the wholesale dealers for the relevant years companytained terms and companyditions similar to those mentioned in Exhibit A annexed to the writ petition.
Apart from these sales, it also sells the articles to wholesale dealers from different parts of the companyntry in pursuance of agreements entered into with them.
Appeal by certificate from the judgment and order dated August 14, 17, 1970 of the Bombay High Court in Misc.
1091 S Desai, Govind Das, B. H. Antia and B. D. Sharma, for the appellants.
The High Court allowed the petition.
The agreements provided, among other things, that the dealers should number sell the articles sold to them except in accordance with the list prices fixed by the respondent, that the respondent would sell them the articles at the list prices less 22 per cent discount, that the dealers will number be entitled to any discount on the prices of accessories mentioned in, the price schedule and that the dealers should give service to the units sold in their territory.
This case was accepted by the excise authorities and assessments were made upto the end of 1962 on that basis.
This appeal, by certificate, is against that order.
Excise duty on the basis of ad valorem value was imposed on air companyditioners, water companylers and parts of water companylers from March 1, 1961.
324 of 1967.
From these offices it effects direct sales to companysumers at list prices and the sales so effected companye to about 90 to 95 per cent of its production of these articles in the factory in question during the relevant period.
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Civil Appeal No.
The respondents case was that the list price after 1092 deducting the discount of 22 per cent allowed to the wholesale dealers would companystitute the wholesale cash price, for ascertaining the real value of the articles.
27,57,177.19.
The respondent filed an appeal against the orders but that was dismissed by the 1st appellant by his order dated May 2, 1967 and this was the main order that was challenged in the writ petition.
It carries on, among others, the business of manufacturing air companyditioners, water companylers and companyponent parts thereof.
In April, 1964, the Superintendent of Central Excise intimated the respondent that excise duty would be assessed and levied number on the footing of the wholesale cash price but on the basis of the retail price and, by his three orders dated September 5, 1964 and one dated September 10, 1964, he assessed the respondent to excise duty in respect of the sales on the footing of list prices for sale to companysumers for the period from January 1, 1963, to December 31, 1963, and a numberice of demand dated October 8, 1964, was served on the respondent calling upon it to pay the above sum.
Soli J. Sorabji, D. B. Engineer, P. C. Bhartari and Ravinder Narain, for the intervener Attice Industries Ltd. Soli J. Sorabji and H. K. Puri, for the intervener Bhavsar Chemical Works .
Peti tion No.
47 of 1972.
Voltas Ltd. is a companypany registered under the Companies Act.
It organises the sales of these articles from its head office at Bombay as also from its branch offices at Calcutta, Delhi, Madras, Bangalore, Cochin and Lucknow.
Soli J. Sorabji, K. D. Mehta, P. C. Bhartari, and Ravinder Narain, for the respondent.
Soil J. Sorabji, P. C. Bhartari and Ravinder Narain, for the Intervener Delhi Cloth General Mills Ltd. MATHEW, J. Voltas Ltd., the respondent here, tiled a writ petition before the High Court of Bombay, challenging the validity of the appellate order passed by the 1st appellant on May 2, 1967, in respect of the liability of the respondent to pay excise duty for the year 1963 and the orders of the Assist ant Collector of Central Excise relating to the liability of the respondent to pay excise duty for the years 1962, 1964, 1965 and 1966, as also the numberice demanding the assessed amount of Rs.
