SABYASACHI MUKHARJI, J.

( 1 ) THREE questions fall for consideration in this case, namely : (1) Whether a pre-end in process article manufactured is exigible to duty under the provisions of the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944. (2) If so, when such duties have not been paid over the years, whether such duties can be realised by the Government. (3) Where the manufacturer has over the years paid duties on the basis that such duties were payayle on one of the items manufactured by it which has been subsequently held by the authorities to be not dutiable, can the manufacturer enforce refund of the duties paid in an application under Article 226 of the Constitution. None of these questions is unique but all the three require restatement and application of the well-settled principles of law to the facts of this case. It is, therefore, necessary to refer to the facts briefly.

( 2 ) ON 24th March, 1975 the petitioner moved this application under Article 226 of the Constitution and obtained a rule nisi. It was recorded by this court on 7th May, 1975 that without prejudice to the rights and contentions of the petitioner that the rough rolled zinc used for punching zinc calots was not she

Click Here to Read the rest of this document