TMI Blog1991 (2) TMI 126X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... lphate of all metals. M/s. Zinc Products has preferred W.P. No. 19379 of 1990 questioning the communication dated 26-11-1990 of the Superintendent of Central Excise, Madras, whereunder M/s. Zinc Products has been called upon to classify its product zinc sulphate micro nutrients under Heading 38.08 and there is a further call to furnish the requisite particulars on that basis. W.P. No. 19671 of 1990 was preferred by M/s. Swathy Chemicals (P) Ltd., which is also a manufacturer of the very same product, to quash the order of the Central Board of Excise and Customs dated 26-6-1990 and it has also preferred W.P. No. 19672 of 1990, impugning the communication of the Superintendent of Central Excise, Madras, dated 26-11-1990. All the four Writ Pet ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ts, submitted that in view of the express language used in the said communication, there is no scope for the parties to make further say on the question, and the Superintendent of Central Excise, Madras, has already declared in the said communication that the products of the appellants have to come only under Heading 38.08, and driving his clients to participate in any adjudication proceedings pursuant to the said communication in the said circumstances will be a futile process. We did go through the contents of the communication of the Superintendent of Central Excise, Madras, dated 26-11-1990 and we find that the complaint of the learned Counsel for the appellant is not without substance. There has been a stand expressed therein that the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... erned to issue the requisite show cause to the appellants if there is a warrant for the same and if that event happens, it is for the appellants to express their stand and if they are to face any adverse proceedings, liberty is theirs to seek the due process of law, as stated above. Hence, the dismissal by the learned Single Judge of the Writ Petitions questioning the order dated 26-6-1990 of the Central Board of Excise and Customs will have to stand subject to the above. Accordingly, W.A. Nos. 59 and 60 of 1991 are dismissed, subject to what all we have observed above with reference to the steps if any to be taken by the authorities. W.A. Nos. 58 and 61 of 1991 are allowed, quashing the communication of the Superintendent of Central Excise ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
