POULOSE AND MATHEN Vs. COLLECTOR OF CENTRAL EXCISE
LAWS(SC)-1997-2-130
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA (FROM: DELHI)
Decided on
February 04,1997
POULOSE AND MATHEN
Appellant
VERSUS
COLLECTOR OF CENTRAL EXCISE
Respondents
Referred Judgements :-
UNION OF INDIA COLLECTOR OF CENTRAL EXCISE PATNA COLLECTOR OF CENTRAL EXCISE COLLECTOR OF CENTRAL EXCISE INDORE VS. INDIAN ALUMINIUM COMPANY LIMITED:BIHAR EXTRUSION COMPANY LIMITED :HINDUSTAN ALUMINIUM CORPN LIMITED :UNIVERSAL CABLE LIMITED [REFERRED TO]Cited Judgements :-
STATE OF KARNATAKA VS. BALAJI COMPUTER [LAWS(SC)-2006-12-5] [REFERRED TO]HARYANA ACRYLIC MANUFACTURING COMPANY PRIVATE LIMITED VS. COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS APPEALS NEW DELHI [LAWS(DLH)-2000-5-26] [REFERRED TO]
UIVERSAL ENTERPRISES VS. COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS APPEALS NEW DELHI [LAWS(DLH)-2000-5-45] [REFERRED]
N G ENTERPRISES VS. COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS APPEALS NEW DELHI [LAWS(DLH)-2000-5-72] [REFERRED . 5.]
SHAHNAZ AYURVEDICS VS. COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE [LAWS(ALL)-2004-1-28] [REFERRED TO]
CRANE BETEL NUT POWDER WORKS VS. COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS AND CENTRAL EXCISE TIRUPATHI [LAWS(APH)-2005-9-49] [REFERRED TO]
SUBHASH MARKETING VS. COMMISSIONER OF COMMERCIAL TAXES [LAWS(KAR)-1999-11-21] [REFERRED TO]
DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF COMMERCIAL TAXES VS. KIRLOSKAR FERROUS INDUSTRIES LIMITED [LAWS(KAR)-2001-8-25] [REFERRED TO]
TERAI OVERSEAS LIMITED VS. COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS [LAWS(CAL)-2001-7-48] [REFERRED TO]
BALAJI COMPUTERS VS. STATE OF KARNATAKARESENTED [LAWS(KAR)-2005-9-45] [REFERRED TO]
BINANI INDUSTRIES LIMITED VS. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF COMMERCIAL TAXES [LAWS(KAR)-2005-10-31] [REFERRED TO]
GODREJ INDUSTRIES LIMITED VS. D G AHIRE [LAWS(BOM)-2002-9-105] [REFERRED TO]
SHRI RAM MARBLE ARTICLE INDUSTRIES VS. STATE OF RAJASTHAN [LAWS(RAJ)-2000-1-64] [REFERRED TO]
MORIROKU UT INDIA PVT. LTD VS. STATE OF U.P. [LAWS(ALL)-2007-4-400] [REFERRED TO]
COLLECTOR OF CENTRAL EXCISE PATNA VS. USHA MARTIN INDUSTRIES [LAWS(SC)-1997-8-59] [RELIED ON]
CENTRAL BOARD OF DIRECT TAXES NEW DELHI VS. OBEROI HOTELS INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED [LAWS(SC)-1998-3-106] [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF KARNATAKA VS. BALAJI COMPUTERS [LAWS(SC)-2006-12-27] [REFERRED TO]
ELGI EQUIPMENTS VS. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF COMMERCIAL TAXES [LAWS(ST)-2001-8-1] [REFERRED TO]
ALPHONSE JOSEPH VS. COMMISSIONER OF C. EX. & CUS., BANGALORE [LAWS(CE)-2006-9-42] [REFERRED TO]
BAKELITE HYLAM LTD. VS. COMMISSIONER OF C. EX., HYDERABAD [LAWS(CE)-2010-2-29] [REFERRED TO]
OCL INDIA LTD. VS. COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS, VISAKHAPATNAM [LAWS(CE)-2009-3-135] [REFERRED TO]
INTERNATIONAL AMUSEMENT LTD. VS. COMMISSIONER OF CUS., BANGALORE [LAWS(CE)-2005-12-97] [REFERRED TO]
COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE, CALCUTTA-I VS. BATA INDIA LTD. [LAWS(CE)-2000-3-109] [REFERRED TO]
C. NET COMMUNICATION (INDIA) PVT. VS. COMMR. OF CUS. [LAWS(CE)-2000-2-86] [REFERRED TO]
SUPER ASSOCIATES AND SUPERFIL VS. CCE [LAWS(CE)-2003-7-274] [REFERRED TO]
I.T.C. LTD. VS. CC [LAWS(CE)-2002-8-169] [REFERRED TO]
SEMAC LTD. VS. COMMISSIONER OF SERVICE TAX [LAWS(CB)-2010-11-2] [REFERRED TO]
HINDUSTAN UNILEVER LIMITED VS. STATE OF UTTARAKHAND [LAWS(UTN)-2015-9-63] [REFERRED]
M/S D.C. FOOD PRODUCTS VS. COMMISSIONER OF TRADE TAX, U.P. LUCKNOW [LAWS(ALL)-2016-8-92] [REFERRED TO]
NEW DELHI MUNICIPAL COUNCIL VS. HARI RAM TIWARI [LAWS(DLH)-2020-10-139] [REFERRED TO]
JUDGEMENT
Paripoornan, J. -
(1.)The appellant is a small scale industry. It carries on the business of manufacture of liquid Carbon Dioxide (Co2) conforming to ISI Grades. The factory is situated at Kalamassery in Ernakulam District, Kerala State. The first respondent in this appeal is the Collector of Central Excise, Cochin. The second respondent is the fertiliser and Chemicals Travancore Limited (FACT). The appeal is filed under Section 35L (b) of the Central Excise and Salt Act, 1944, against the order dated 18-3-1986 passed by the Central Excise and Gold (Control) Appellate Tribunal, New Delhi substantially modifying the order passed in the appellants favour by the Appellate Collector of Central Excise, Madras dated 18-6-1982. The Appellant Collector set aside the order of the Assistant Collector rendered on 2-2-1982 holding that the appellant is not entitled to the benefit of exemption notification No. 7/65-Ce dated 30-1-1965.
(2.)The facts of this case are in a narrow compass. The appellants manufacture carbon di-oxide of ISI specification out of raw carbon dioxide gas received through pipe line from M/s. FACT Ltd., Eloor. The raw carbon dioxide is odourous and has a purity of less than 99% and contains moisture above 0.1%. Such raw carbon dioxide is subjected to various processes in order to remove traces of moisture, oxide of sulphur etc. The gas is then dried and fed into Rotary Booster compressor to boost the pressure to a very high point and then passed through activated carbon to remove final traces of oil and also to deodourise. The pure gas obtained after these processes is liquified and filled in cylinders and removed therefrom for making further products or for sale.
(3.)At the relevant time, Carbonic Acid (carbon dioxide) was specified in Entry No. 14H (iv) of the Ist Schedule to the Central Excise Act, 1944 and was assessable to duty of excise at the rates in force from time to time. The appellants had taken out L. 4 licence for the manufacture of carbon dioxide. They were permitted to remove waste gas generated from M/s. Fertiliser and Chemicals Travancore Ltd., in view of paragraph 2 of Notification No. 7/65 dated 30-1-1965 after taking out L.6 licence. The licence was granted on 11-3-1977. Under notification No. 7/65, carbon dioxide falling under item 14H of the Central Excise Tariff was exempted from the whole of the duty of excise leviable thereon, provided it was used for any "industrial purpose" and subject to the procedure in Chapter X of the Central Excise Rules and it is common ground that such procedure was followed by the appellant by taking out L. 6 licence. The appellants had given an undertaking that they would pay the duty on the carbon dioxide received for processing (raw carbon dioxide-waste gas) in case it was subsequently decided that they were not entitled to receive the said carbon dioxide free of duty under Notification No. 7/65.
(2.)The facts of this case are in a narrow compass. The appellants manufacture carbon di-oxide of ISI specification out of raw carbon dioxide gas received through pipe line from M/s. FACT Ltd., Eloor. The raw carbon dioxide is odourous and has a purity of less than 99% and contains moisture above 0.1%. Such raw carbon dioxide is subjected to various processes in order to remove traces of moisture, oxide of sulphur etc. The gas is then dried and fed into Rotary Booster compressor to boost the pressure to a very high point and then passed through activated carbon to remove final traces of oil and also to deodourise. The pure gas obtained after these processes is liquified and filled in cylinders and removed therefrom for making further products or for sale.
(3.)At the relevant time, Carbonic Acid (carbon dioxide) was specified in Entry No. 14H (iv) of the Ist Schedule to the Central Excise Act, 1944 and was assessable to duty of excise at the rates in force from time to time. The appellants had taken out L. 4 licence for the manufacture of carbon dioxide. They were permitted to remove waste gas generated from M/s. Fertiliser and Chemicals Travancore Ltd., in view of paragraph 2 of Notification No. 7/65 dated 30-1-1965 after taking out L.6 licence. The licence was granted on 11-3-1977. Under notification No. 7/65, carbon dioxide falling under item 14H of the Central Excise Tariff was exempted from the whole of the duty of excise leviable thereon, provided it was used for any "industrial purpose" and subject to the procedure in Chapter X of the Central Excise Rules and it is common ground that such procedure was followed by the appellant by taking out L. 6 licence. The appellants had given an undertaking that they would pay the duty on the carbon dioxide received for processing (raw carbon dioxide-waste gas) in case it was subsequently decided that they were not entitled to receive the said carbon dioxide free of duty under Notification No. 7/65.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.