Per Justice U.L. Bhat: Since common questions arise in these appeals, they have been heard together and are being disposed of by a common order. These appeals have been referred to a larger Bench, since the Benches which heard the appeals at an earlier stage doubted the correctness of certain decisions of the Tribunal in regard to the matter in issue. In spite of notice, the assessees have not appeared nor arranged representations before us. However, assessees in appeal Nos. E. 289/ 90, E.524/91 and E.4423/94 have sent written submission. We have heard Shri Sanjeev Sachdeva, SDR and perused the papers.

2. All the assessees are SSI units manufacturing various final products and enjoying the exemption granted under Notification No. 175/86—CE dated 1.3.1986 as amended according to which, they are entitled to exemption of duty in respect of first clearances upto the value of Rs. 30 lacs and to concessional rate of duty beyond Rs. 30 lacs but subject to a limit. The dispute in these appeals relates to the interpretation of the words "first clearances".

3. We will briefly refer to the facts of these cases. E.289/90: Appellant is manufacturer of chair conveyer (Heading 8428.00) and coal tubes (Heading 8609.00). Appellant availed of the exemption in regard to clearances of coal tubes of the value of Rs. 15 lacs and thereafter, cleared coal tubes on payment of duty. Appellant also cleared chain conveyers free of duty. If the value of coal tubes cleared on payment of duty (after clearing free of duty up to Rs. 15 lakhs) is to be reckoned for computing the limit of Rs. 30 lacs, appellant would not be entitled to duty free clearance of chain conveyers upto the limit of Rs. 15 lacs less the value of coal tubes cleared on payment of duty. The dispute related to the clearance of chain conveyers made on 28—11—1986 quoting a particular value which was found to be undervaluation to the extent of Rs. 15,250.00. The correct value was determined by the department subsequently. The dispute relates to the duty payable on this amount which was found to be in excess of Rs. 30 lacs. The Additional Collector held that appellant was not entitled to the benefit of notification No. 175/86—CE in regard to this amount. Appellant has also raised the contention that the show cause notice was barred by time, since the proviso to Section 11 of the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944 would not be applicable.

E/100/91 Appellant manufactures mill machines under Chapter 84 of the Central Excise Tariff Act and stranded steel wire under Chapter 73 of the Act. The dispute relates to the year 1989—90 when the appellant was enjoying the benefit of the notification. By October, 1989, appellant has cleared stranded steel wire almost to the limit of Rs. 151acs without payment of duty. Appellant also cleared steel stranded wire of the value above Rs. 55 lacs at a concessional rate of duty under the notification the total being above Rs. 70 lacs. Appellant was clearing mil 1 machinery without payment of duty under the notification. The disputes relates to the clearance of mill machinery of the value of Rs. 3.90 lacs on 26.11.1989 before which date the total clearances of the appellant crossed the Rs. 75 lacs limit. The Assistant Collector held that the benefit under the notification was not available in regard to this amount and duty was payable. This order was confirmed by the Additional Collector. E/524/91 Respondent manufactures final products coming under two different Chapters. In regard to articles falling under one Chapter, appellant availed exemption up to the¹ value of Rs. 15 lacs and thereafter cleared such articles on concessional rate of duty. In regard to other articles, clearance was made up to the full value of Rs. 15 lacs. According to the show cause notice, a part of the clearance would not receive the benefit of the notification, since prior thereto clearances of over Rs. 30 lacs had been made. However, after further consideration, the Addl. Col lector held