V.T. Raghavachari, Member (J)

1. The appellants, M/s. Ess Ess Kay Engineering Co. (P) Ltd., are manufacturers, amongst other things, of electric lamp holders. During the period 18-6-77 to 6-10-77, they cleared such lamp holders on payment of Central Excise duty at 2% under TI 68 CET. Later on a notice dated 27-12-78 was issued to them to show cause why differential duty should not be demanded from them as the said lamp holders were classifiable under TI 61 CET. After they had replied, the Assistant Collector of Central Excise, Jallandhar under order dated 20-5-80 dropped the demand on the basis that the same was barred by time. The Collector of Central Excise, Chandigarh issued notice for review of the said order under Section 35A of the Central Excises and Salt Act. After receipt of the reply the Collector by order dated 6-12-80 set aside the order of the Assistant Collector and vacated the same and confirmed the demand raised earlier. It is against the said order that the appellants preferred a revision petition to the Government which, on transfer, is now before us as an appeal.

2. We have heard Sri V.K. Agarwal, Advocate, for the appellants and Shri V. Ohri, SDR, for the dep