1983 (10) TMI 245 - AT - Central Excise

Summary

Issues:
Classification of vessels for concessional excise rates, refund of duties paid, interpretation of relevant excise laws and notifications.

Analysis:
The case involved appeals regarding the classification of vessels for concessional excise rates and refund of duties paid by Bharat Petroleum. The appellants sought permission to supply bunker supplies as ships stores at concessional rates of excise duties for lighterage vessels unloading crude oil cargo from tankers anchored off the Indian Coast. The Assistant Collector rejected the classification list, which was upheld by the Appellate Collector, leading to the present appeals before the Tribunal.

The Counsel for Bharat Petroleum relied on a Calcutta High Court judgment regarding similar circumstances involving super tankers and lighterage vessels. The High Court held that the entire journey from a foreign port to an Indian port constituted one journey for carriage of imported goods, considering the vessels as foreign-going vessels. Bharat Petroleum argued that their case, with the super tanker anchored outside Indian territorial waters, was stronger than the precedent.

The Respondent cited a decision challenging the Calcutta High Court judgment and argued that it was not binding on the Tribunal in Delhi. The Tribunal noted the distinction between customs and excise laws in the present case, emphasizing the need to analyze the matter under relevant excise law provisions rather than customs law.

Examining the relevant Central Excise Rules, the Tribunal discussed notifications granting rebate of duty paid on excisable goods exported outside India. The notifications specified conditions for rebate, including destinations outside India. The Tribunal analyzed the term "territory outside India" in the context of the notifications and concluded that a place beyond Indian territorial waters did not qualify as a territory outside India for the purpose of the notifications. Therefore, Bharat Petroleum was not entitled to the benefits under the notifications.

In light of the discussions and analysis, the Tribunal found no merit in the appeals and dismissed them. The order was directed to be placed in both appeal files for reference and compliance.