The entitlement to relief from the Appellate Authority in addition to the relief granted under the court's Order.

In W.P. 882 of 1990, the relief claimed reads as follows :-

"For the reasons stated in the accompanying affidavit, it is prayed that this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to call for the records of 2nd respondent culminating the order bearing reference No. 86/90, dated 15-1-1990 as amended by letter No. 96/90, dated 19-1-1990 and issue a writ ofcertiorarior any other appropriate writ or order or direction in the nature of writ and quash the same and pass such further or other orders............"

In W.P. No. 7684 of 1990, the prayer reads as follows :-

" For the reasons stated in the accompanying affidavit, it is prayed that this Honourable Court may be pleased to call for the records of the Second Respondent culminating in his communication bearing reference No. .../90, dated 12-1-1990 and issue a writ ofcertiorarior any other appropriate writ or order or direction in the nature of a writ and quash the same and pass such further or other orders as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper ........"*

2.Pending disposal of the writ petitions, the Central Board of Excise and Customs, by letter dated 23-12-1992, has issued certain clarification regarding MODVAT provisions, applicable to a manufacturer factorywise. Paragraph 3 of that letter is relevant for our purpose, and it reads as follows :-

"Thus, in case the factory A seeks to merge/amalgamate with factory B, the quantum of credit that can be permitted to be transferred to the books of factory B would be equivalent to the total of the credit on the inputs which are (i) lying in stock and/or (ii) in process and (iii) contained in the final products lying in the stock. This would be subject to the condition that such credit has not been availed earlier by the assessee under any other rule or notification and consequently cannot exceed the balance available in the RG 23A. This is to ensure that the assessee does not avail of the same input credit more than once. Any excess credit lying in the RG 23A of Factory A, the credit beyond that is specified above, would lapse and would not be admissible for transfer."

3.Learned counsel on both sides have fairly stated before me that in view of the Board's above letter, no elaborate order is necessary except to indicate the above paragraph in the Order, while disposing the writ petitions.

4.Mr. S. Subramanian, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner in both the cases, further wanted an observation with regard to W.P. No. 882 of 1990. According to the learned counsel, an appeal is pending before the Appellate Authority, and in the event of the petitioner in W.P. No. 882 of 1990 succeeding before the Appellate Authority in the pending appeal, the fruits of such success must not be denied in view of the disposal of the writ petition under this Order.

5.In view of the above, the proceedings impugned in these writ petitions are set aside, and the respondents are at liberty to pass fresh orders, if necessary, in the light of Central Board's letter dated 23-12-1992, in particular, paragraph 3 extracted above.

6.It is made clear that the petitioner in W.P. 882 of 1990 in the event of getting any relief from the Appellate Authority, will be entitled to it, in addition to the relief granted under this Order.

7.In the result, both the writ petitions are ordered accordingly. No costs.