PER JUSTICE U.L. BHAT :

Collector of Central Excise, Pune, has filed this appeal against the order passed by the Collector (Appeals), Bombay, confirming the order passed by Assistant Collector, Pune, dropping certain demands under four show cause notices.

2. Respondent, engaged in the manufacture of Power-driven pumps (T.I. 30A) and Agitators (T.I. 68) has been purchasing electric motors. The dispute in the appeal relates to the period 1.4.1981 to 31.12.1983 and 1.4.1984 to 3.6.1984. During these periods, respondent was clearing Agitators along with electric motors, on payment of excise duty on the value of Agitators and clearing PD Pumps along with Electric Motors on payment of excise duty on the value of PD Pumps. Value of Electric Motors was not being included in the assessable value of Agitators and PD Pumps. Electric Motors were supplied along with Agitators or PD Pumps only at the request of buyers. Respondent was also clearing Agitators and PD Pumps without Electric Motors in cases where buyers did not require the latter. On 9.3.1984, Superintendent of Central Excise, Mahindra Owen Range issued two notices to respondent to show cause against demand of excise duty for the