- (1.) We are concerned with the period 1st March, 1979 to 1st, March, 1980. During that period Item 23-A of the First Schedule to the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944, relating to glass and glassware, read: ". . . . . .(4) Other glass and glassware including tableware. . . . .Thirty-five per cent ad valorem." Prior thereto, this sub-entry had related only to other glassware.
(2.) The respondents manufactured glass. They had cleared molten and broken glass ("bhagar") without payment of excise duty, after 1st March, 1979. On 25th August, 1980 they were served with a notice to show cause why they should not be required to pay excise duty on such molten and broken glass, having regard to the change in the Entry. The show-cause notice was duly made absolute. The matter was ultimately carried by the Revenue to the Central Excise and Gold (Control) Appellate Tribunal. The Tribunal, relying mainly upon the judgment of the High Court at Delhi in the case of Modi Rubber Ltd. v. Union of India, (1987) 29 ELT 502 concluded that the molten and broken glass were not goods for the purposes of the levy of excise duty.
(3.) The Revenue is in appeal and it is contended that the Tribunal, when disposing of the present matter, failed to notice its earlier judgment dated 9th February, 1995 in the case of Collector of Central Excise, Kanpur v. M/s. Hindustan Scientific Glass and Fancy Glassware Works, Makhanpur where it had been held that molten and broken glass were different from the raw materials thereof, namely, silica sand, soda ash and chemicals; that labour and energy had been employed in bringing about the transformation from the raw materials to the finished products; and that, to persons dealing in such materials they were known as broken glass and waste glass. The Tribunal found that there was no doubt that broken and molten glass were basically glass and had to be considered to be manufactured items which were regularly bought and sold and which fetched a considerable value. They were, therefore, goods and excisable.;