D.C. Mandal, Member (T)

1. By the Miscellaneous application No. E/Misc./238/88-C the appellants have sought to introduce an affidavit dated 21-4-1988 of Shri Bhaskar Ramchandra Malevar as an additional evidence and have prayed for admitting the same as forming part of the records of the case. In this affidavit Shri Malevar has affirmed about the ingredients of Kajal manufactured by the appellants and the process, of manufacture of the said product. It also says that none of the ingredients loses Its identity during the process of mixture, which is not a chemical process but a physical process. Shri Doiphode arguing for the respondent has stated that the ground that there is no chemical transformation, was not raised before the lower authorities. In the review petition also they did not say so. The process of manufacture was also not stated before the Assistant Collector. Shri Doiphode has opposed the introduction of this new evidence at this stage. In support of his objection he has cited the authority of the Supreme Court judgment in the case of State of U.P. v. Manbodhan Lal Srivastava, reported in MANU/SC/0123/1957 : AIR 1957 S.C. 912. In the said judgment the Hon'ble Suprem