COLLECTOR OF CENTRAL EXCISE, VADODRA. vs M/S DHIREN CHEMICAL INDUSTRIES .

The Supreme Court referred the case of Dhiren Chemical Industries to a Constitution Bench due to conflicting interpretations of the phrase 'on which the appropriate amount of duty of excise has already been paid' in two prior judgments: Collector of Central Excise, Patna vs. Usha Martin Industries and Motiram Tolaram & Anr. vs. Union of India. The Court held that the term 'appropriate' should not be sidelined and that the exemption notification aims to prevent double duty on raw materials and their end products. The Court ultimately upheld the assessee's contention, allowing for broader interpretation of the exemption clause.