RATHI ALLOYS AND STEEL LIMITED ALWAR MEHTA ALLOYS AND STEEL WORKS LUDHIANA RATHI ALLOYS AND STEEL LIMITED Vs. COLLECTOR CENTRAL EXCISE JAIPUR:COLLECTOR CENTRAL EXCISE CHANDIGARH:ASSISTANT COLLECTOR CUSTOMS AND CENTRAL EXCISE DIVN JAIPUR
LAWS(SC)-1990-3-21
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA (FROM: RAJASTHAN)
Decided on March 06,1990

RATHI ALLOYS AND STEEL LIMITED,ALWAR,MEHTA ALLOYS AND STEEL WORKS,LUDHIANA Appellant
VERSUS
COLLECTOR,CENTRAL EXCISE,JAIPUR,COLLECTOR,CENTRAL EXCISE,CHANDIGARH,ASSISTANT COLLECTOR,CUSTOMS AND CENTRAL EXCISE DIVN.,JAIPUR Respondents


Referred Judgements :-

CENTURY IRON AND STEEL LTD.,IN RE [REFERRED TO]



Cited Judgements :-

ROSSA VS. STATE OF KERALA [LAWS(KER)-1991-6-1] [REFERRED TO]
NARENDRA OIL REFINERIES VS. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA [LAWS(BOM)-1990-4-4] [REFERRED TO]
BHAGGIYAVATHI VS. COMMISSIONER OF CIVIL SUPPLIES AND CONSUMER PROTECTION CHEPAUK [LAWS(MAD)-2000-4-55] [REFERRED TO]
RAM NIWAS VS. STATE OF HARYANA [LAWS(P&H)-2006-5-54] [REFERRED TO]
ROCHEES HOTELS PVT LTD VS. JAIPUR DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY [LAWS(RAJ)-2001-9-55] [REFERRED TO]
PAPINDER SINGH VS. STATE OF HARYANA [LAWS(P&H)-2011-3-315] [REFERRED TO]
MARY PHILIP VS. K S H B [LAWS(KER)-1992-7-29] [REFERRED TO]
COLLECTOR OF CENTRAL EXCISE VS. MODI STEEL LTD. [LAWS(CE)-1995-6-47] [REFERRED TO]
ICI INDIA LTD. VS. COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS [LAWS(CE)-2002-9-181] [REFERRED TO]
OM PRAKASH, INSPECTOR VS. STATE OF HARYANA AND ANR [LAWS(P&H)-2010-3-413] [REFERRED]
MAJOR GULSHAN KUMAR (RETD.) VS. DELHI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY [LAWS(DLH)-2017-4-83] [REFERRED TO]


JUDGEMENT

R. M. Sahai, J. - (1.)Manufacturers of Steel ingots, out of iron and steel melting scrap with aid of electric arc furnace, challenged notices issued under Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944 for short levy on clearances of Runners and Risers and claimed that as they, too, were steel ingots or Melting Scrap they were liable to same duty as was payable on ingots, therefore, the notices issued to them were liable to be discharged.
(2.)Runners and Risers are solidified moulten metal in refractory channel leading to casting or ingot mould. The Tribunal (Customs Excise and Gold Control Appellate Tribunal found that since they are found in narrow channel and they are not of any predetermined size of devised for producing solidified material for any particular use they could not be considered as ingots. They were held to be scrap. And the claim of exemption or concessional rate of duty was not accepted as it could not be extended to scrap.
(3.)Tariff Item No. 26 of the Schedule to the Act during relevant period read as under:
"Steel ingot including steel melting scrap."
From March, 1969 onwards various notifications were issued exempting or levying duty on concessional rate on steel ingot manufactured with the aid of electric furnace provided the manufacture was done in the manner provided in the notifications. Since steel melting scrap was not mentioned doubt arose if the exemption under the notification issued from time to time extended to the entire entry of Tariff Item No. 26 or it was confined to steel ingots. The Board clarified it by saying that, "description of the Item No. 26 read as "Steel Ingots including Steel Melting Scrap". The notification referred to above, therefore should be read in the context of the Tariff description and not in isolation. Thus, the exemption contemplated in the aforesad Notification relates not only to Steel ingots but also to Steel melting scrap arising in Electric furnace units." Effect of this was that the Government of India, even, in exercise of its power as quasi-judicial authority held in Century Iron and Steel Ltd., 1982 ELT 761, that runners and risers obtained during manufacture of steel ingot was also exempt from the date of notification issued in 1979. Details furnished by the department in pursuance of order passed by this Court further shows that Runners and Risers have not been subjected to levy in some States and even refund has been allowed in some cases.
;


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.