The exemption under a Notification should be construed strictly and cannot be extended, but the exception to the exemption should not be interpreted in a manner that whittles down the exemption by importing limitations not specifically inserted by the language used in the Exception clause.

NAINAR SUNDARAM, J

These writ appeals have been directed against the common order of the learned single Judge in W.P. Nos. 11871 and 11872 of 1989. The writ petitions were filed by the appellants, putting forth the following prayer:

"For the reasons stated in the accompanying affidavit it is prayed that this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to issue aWrit of Mandamusor any other appropriate writ, order or direction directing the respondents 1 to 3 to permit the petitioner's members to avail of the benefit of the Notification No. 175/86-C.E., dated 1-3-1986 and to clear their goods without payment of duty under the said Notification and render justice." *

The respondents in the writ petitions are the respondents in these writ appeals. For the sake of convenience, we are referring to the parties as per their nomenclature in the writ petitions. We shall presently advert to the relevant portions of the Notification No. 175/86-C.E., dated 1-3-1986, which shall hereinafter be referred to as the Notification. Suffice it to state at this juncture that the Notification accords exemption to goods produced by small scale industrial undertakings. The Units of which the petitioners are the Associations, and which Units hereinafter shall be called the Units, are ancillary to Bharat Heavy Electricals Limited, briefly referred to as BHEL, the fourth respondent. They fabricate certain components required by BHEL. It is only in respect of such components, manufactured by the Units, exemption was asked for as per the Notification. The exemption was not accorded to the Units, on the ground that clause (7) read with Explanation VIII of the Notification is attracted to the components manufactured by the Units. This contention put forth by respondents 1 to 3 has been accepted by the learned single Judge, and as a result, the writ petitions were dismissed. As already noted, these writ appeals are directed against the common order of the learned single Judge in the writ petitions.

2.The learned single Judge, in substance, opined that certain stencil marks on the components manufactured by the Units made by them would make the components, though manufactured by the Units, as having been affixed with a brand name or a trade name of BHEL, which is not eligible for the grant of exemption under the Notification within the meaning of clause (7) read with Explanation VIII of the Notification. The learned single Judge accepted the position that the Units are the manufacturers of the components, though they may be doing job works for BHEL. As such, prima facie, the components manufactured by the Units must have the benefit of the Notification. Only by construing the stencil marks made by the Units on the components manufactured by them, as the brand name or trade of BHEL, the benefit of the exemption has been denied to the Units. This construction of the learned single Judge is the subject matter of challenge in these two writ appeals.

3.With reference to what exactly have been and are being marked or inscribed, by way of stencilling on the components, manufactured by the Units, they are delineated in the common order of the learned single Judge and they refer to quantity, weight, work order number, product number and ancillary Unit Firm code number allotted by BHEL. We find that in the grounds of these writ appeals and in particular Grounds (I) and (J) the very same details of the markings or inscriptions by way of stencilling, stated to have been made and are being made on the components, manufactured by the Units, except for one addition, namely, the destination of the goods have been given. There is no dispute raised before us over the factum of the details of such markings or inscriptions. The markings or inscriptions, as set out in the Grounds of Writ Appeals, are as follows :

"14 Nos.

872.36 kgs.

WO 0237.415.1.77

DU001

R83

Mettur'

In fact, samples of the components manufactured by the Units were produced by Mr. P. Narasimhan, learned Senior Central Govern