Order
1. What was argued before the High Court was this:
“Shri S.P Gupta, learned Senior Counsel for the petitioners contended that the value of the clearances of excisable goods in the year 1978-79 exceeded Rs 20,00,000, is the manifestly erroneous view of the matter inasmuch as the clubbing of clearances of M/s Naharwar Engineering Works with that of M/s Ved Engineering Works is not permissible under law.”
What is now sought to be argued is that the goods in question are not excisable goods by reason of the fact that they were, at the relevant time, exempt from the payment of excise duty. The two arguments are very different. There is no question of reading what was argued before the High Court “broadly”, as was submitted, to cover the argument that is being advanced now. It is clear that it was not disputed before the High Court that the goods were excisable goods. We decline, in the circumstances, to entertain in any respect this argument.
2. We find no merit in the appeal and it is dismissed with costs.