Supreme Court of India
COLLECTOR OF CENTRAL EXCISE, NEW DELHI versus HINDUSTAN SANITARYWARE & INDUSTRIES
- Decided
- 10 September 2002
- Judges listed
- S.S.M. QUADRI, S.N. VARIAVA
- Disposal
- Dismissed
Citations
- Official
- [2002] SUPP. 2 S.C.R. 224 · 2002 INSC 375
- Not shown
- 1 other citation string that other judgments attach to this one, on evidence too thin or too divided to publish.
Cited by
Cited in 1 other Supreme Court judgment we hold.
Counted only in the Supreme Court judgments we hold whose text we could read, not in High Court judgments. We match each citation to a judgment automatically, so a citation we cannot match is not counted. "Cited" says only that a judgment refers to this one, not whether it followed, distinguished or overruled it.
The Court's text
Paragraphs from our copy of the Supreme Court Reports print, with the Court's own paragraph numbers, the printed page and, where printed, the margin letter. The Court did not number this judgment's paragraphs, so they are listed by page. Link to paragraph N with #para-N.
These two appeals arise from the judgments of the Customs, Excise and Gold (Control) Appellate Tribunal in Order No. 304/91-C in E/Appeal No. 3841/90-C dated April 1, 1991 and in Order No. 600191-C in E/Appeal No. 2031 /9 l-C dated July 19, 1991. The judgment in Order No. 304/91-C in Appeal No. 3841/90-C dated April I, 1991 is followed in Order No. 600/91in E/Appeal No. 2031/91-C dated July 19, 1991.
pp. 224–225, margin G
The respondent, a manufacturer of sanitaryware, uses plaster of paris inputs for the final product of sanitaryware. The process involves making moulds from plaster of paris which are in turn used as inputs for manufacture of sanitaryware. Tbe rc·spondent claimed the benefit of exemption under Notification No. 217/86 (as amended by Notification No. 82/87-CE.)
p. 225, margin C
In these cases, though the Excise authorities declined to grant the benefit of exemption, the Customs, Excise and Gold (Control) Appellate Tribunal set aside their orders and held that the exemption would apply to the respondent.
p. 225, margin B
Mr. R.P. Bhan, learned senior counsel appearing for the revenue, contends that as the moulds of plaster of paris are goods classified under the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985 they cannot be treated as inputs; they must be treated a the final product and as they are exempted, the respondent is not entitled to the benefit of exemption under Notification No. 217 /86.
p. 225, margin C
We are afraid, we cannot accept the contention of the learned senior counsel.
p. 225, margin D
The said Notification reads as follows: "SPECIFIED GOODS USED WITHIN THE FACTORY OF PRODUCTION IN THE MANUFACTURE OF FINISHED GOODS.
p. 225, margin D
In exercise of the powers conferred by sub-rule (I) of Rule 8 of the Central Excise 'Rules, I 944, the Central Government hereby exempts goods specified in column (2) of the Table hereto annexed (hereinafter referred to as 'inputs') manufactured in a factory and used within the factory of production, in or in relation to the manufacture of final products specified in column (3) of the said Table, from the whole of the duty of excise leviable thereon, which is specified in the Schedule to the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985 of 1986) : Provided that nothing contained in this Notification shall apply inputs used in or in relation to the manufacture of final products which are exempts from the whole of duty of excise leviable thereon or is chargeable to nil rate of duty.
p. 225, margin E
Explanation : For the purposes of this notification, "inputs" does not include - (i) to (iv) *** *** ***
p. 226, margin A
THE TABLE S.No. Description of Description of
p. 226, margin A
Inputs final products
p. 226, margin B
I. Goods classifiable under
p. 226, margin B
Goods classifiable under any headings of chapters
p. 226, margin B
any headings of chapters 28,29,30,32,33,34,35,
p. 226, margin C
28,29,30,32,33,34,35, 36,37,38,39,40,48, 70,
p. 226, margin C
36,37,38,39,40, 70, 72, 72, 73, 74, 75, 76, 78, 79,
p. 226, margin C
73, 74, 75, 76, 78, 79, 80, 80, 81, 82, 83, 84, 85, 86,
p. 226, margin C
81, 82, 83, 84, 85, 86, 87, 87, 88, 89, 0, 91, 92, 93,
p. 226, margin C
88, 89,90,91,92,93,94, 94, 95, or 96
p. 226, margin C
95, or 96 (other than those falling
p. 226, margin D
(other than those under Heading Nos.
p. 226, margin D
falling under Heading 36.03 or 3 7 .05) of the
p. 226, margin D
Nos. 36.03 or 37.05) of Schedule to the Central
p. 226, margin D
the Schedule to the Excise Tariff Act, 1985
p. 226, margin D
Central Excise Tariff Act, (5 of 1986)
p. 226, margin E
1985 (5 of 1986)
p. 226, margin E
The Notification, e~tracted above, was amended by Notification No. 82/87-CE which is as under :
p. 226, margin E
"Exemption to captive consumption of MODV AT items - In exercise of the powers conferred by sub-rule (I) of Rule 8 of the Central Excise Rule, 1944, the Central Government hereby makes the following further amendment in the Notification of the Government of India in the Ministry of Finance (Department of Revenue) No. 217/86-Central Excise, dated the 2nd April, 1986, namely:
p. 226, margin F
In the said notification for the Table, the following Table shall be subs.tituted, namely : S.No. Description of Description of
pp. 226–227, margin G
Inputs final products I, Goods classifiable under Goods classifiable under any ~eadings of under any headings of chapters ....... 25 ...... (other chapters ....... 69 ..... (other than those falling under than those falling under Heading Nos. 36.05 or Heading Nos. 36, 05 or 37.06) of the Schedule to 37.06) of the Schedule to the Central Excise Tariff the Central Excise Tariff
p. 227, margin A
Act, 1985 (5 of 1986) Act, 1985 (5 of 1986)
p. 227, margin C
A perusal of the Notification as amended by Notification No. 82/87, extracted above, shows that the description of inputs given in column (2) under Chapter 25, would be 'plaster of paris' and the final product given in column (3) under Chapter 69 would be 'ceramic goods'.
p. 227, margin C
The proviso postulates a situation where the final product itself is exempted iri which case alone the exemption of plaster of paris under Notification No. 217/86 cannot be availed. It is nobody's case that the sanitaryware falling under Chapter 69 has been exempted by the Central Government. What is exempted is plastic moulds but they are only inputs and not final product in this case. This fact is further clarified by the Central Government in Notification No. 221/86, as amended by Notification No. 89/ 89. Item 6 thereof clearly mentions that plaster of paris moulds are input for ceramic products.
p. 227, margin D
From the above discussion, it follows that plaster ofparis which is used as inputs in relation to the manufacture of sanitaryware (final product), is exempt under Notification No. 217 /86 dated April 2, 1986, as amended.
p. 227, margin F
In this view of the matter, we do not find any illegality in the orders under challenge.
p. 227, margin F
The appeals are, therefore, dismissed, but in the circumstances of these, there shall be no order as to costs. R.P. Appeals dismissed.
p. 227, margin G