CWP No.15671 of 1991 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Civil Writ Petition.No.15671 of 1991 Date of decision: 29.7.2011 M/s Ramgarhia Motor Body Builders ...Petitioner Versus Union of India and others ...Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE ADARSH KUMAR GOEL ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE AJAY KUMAR MITTAL Present: Ms. Shilpa Malhotra, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. HPS Ghuman, Sr.Standing Counsel for Union of India. Adarsh Kumar Goel, ACJ. 1. This petition seeks a direction for refund of excise duty and also seeks injunction against requirement of maintaining the records. 2. Case of the petitioner is that it is manufacturing bodies of motor vehicles and uses inputs like steel etc. Earlier, the petitioner was exempt from excise duty being in small scale sector and also being not engaged in manufacture of motor vehicles but only in fabricating bodies of the vehicles but after coming into force of the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985, excise duty is being collected from the petitioner. CWP No.5256 of 1986 was filed in this Court in similar circumstances which was allowed vide judgment reported as Darshan Singh Pavitar Singh, Body Make, Moga and others v. Union of India and others, 1988(1) PLR 637 on the 1 CWP No.15671 of 1991 ground that the petitioners were not engaged in manufacture of motor vehicles and are, thus, not covered by heading No.87.07. Thus, the duty collected from the petitioner is liable to be refunded. 3. Notice was issued. Stand taken on behalf of the Union of India is that no duty is now being levied on the petitioner which is not disputed by learned counsel for the petitioner. 4. Only question which survives in the petition relates to right of refund. 5. Learned counsel for the Union of India states that the refund issue can be raised as per Section 11B of the Central Excise Act, 1944 and if the petitioner makes an appropriate application as per the said specific provision, the same will be dealt with in accordance with law. 6. In view of above, this petition is disposed of with a direction that any application, if pending or made may be disposed of in accordance with law preferably within three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order or from the date of receipt of the application made in pursuance of this order. The petition is disposed of. (Adarsh Kumar Goel) Acting Chief Justice July 29, 2011 (Ajay Kumar Mittal) ‘gs’ Judge 2