2023 (11) TMI 302 - AT - Central Excise

Excisability - books used for internal administration and record keeping in the zonal railway that were printed at zonal railway press - HELD THAT - The issue in dispute is squarely covered by the decision of the Tribunal in re Dy Chief Manager (P S), Central Railway 2015 (6) TMI 374 - CESTAT MUMBAI in relation to the same activity undertaken by the Central Railway which held that product in question are not dutiable on both the counts of classification as well as marketability. The impugned orders lack merit - Appeal allowed.

Summary

Issues Involved:
1. Excisability of books used for internal administration and record-keeping in the zonal railway.
2. Classification of the printed materials under the Central Excise Tariff Act.
3. Marketability of the printed materials.

Summary:

1. Excisability of Books Used for Internal Administration and Record-Keeping:
The central excise authorities contended that the printing of books for internal administration at the zonal railway press amounted to "manufacture," making the goods liable to duties of central excise u/s 11A of the Central Excise Act, 1944. The appellant argued that the goods, being non-marketable and intended exclusively for internal use, are not liable to duties of central excise. The Tribunal found that the issue is covered by its earlier decision in Dy Chief Manager (P & S), Central Railway v. Commissioner of Central Excise, Mumbai - I, which held that similar products are not classifiable under Chapter 48 but under Chapter 49, thus not liable for duty.

2. Classification of the Printed Materials:
The Tribunal referenced several judgments, including Gopsons Papers Ltd. v. Commissioner of Central Excise, Noida, which clarified that products like printed forms, even with blank portions, are classifiable under Chapter 49 as products of the printing industry. The Tribunal concluded that the printed materials in question are correctly classifiable under Chapter 49 and not Chapter 48, as they are essentially printed matter with only some blank columns for filling up by manuscript or typescript.

3. Marketability of the Printed Materials:
The Tribunal emphasized that for goods to be excisable, they must be marketable. It was found that the printed materials, being specific to the Central Railway and not capable of being bought and sold in the market, are not marketable. The Tribunal cited several judgments, including Gujarat Nermada Valley Fert. Co. Ltd. v. Collector of Ex. & Cus., which held that the burden of proving marketability lies on the Revenue. Since the Revenue did not discharge this burden, the Tribunal accepted the appellant's claim that the goods are not marketable.

Conclusion:
The Tribunal set aside the impugned orders, concluding that the printed materials are not dutiable due to their classification under Chapter 49 and lack of marketability. The appeals were allowed with consequential relief in accordance with law. The order was pronounced in the open court on 02/11/2023.