1998 (3) TMI 305 - AT - Central Excise

Summary

Issues: Whether loose cigarettes drawn for test purposes and research and development within the factory are chargeable to duty at the tariff rate or effective rate under Notification No. 14/90-C.E., dated 20-3-1990.

Analysis:
1. The case involved a dispute regarding the assessment of central excise duty on loose cigarettes drawn for test purposes and research and development within a factory by M/s. Godfrey Phillips (I) Ltd. The issue revolved around the applicability of Notification No. 14/90-C.E., dated 20-3-1990, which prescribed specific rates of duty on cigarettes based on their actual length.

2. The respondents had been paying duty at the tariff rate for the loose cigarettes drawn for test purposes and research development, as these cigarettes were not packed in approved packages. The Department had notified the manufacturer to continue paying duty at the tariff rate even after the issuance of Notification No. 14/90-C.E. The Collector of Central Excise (Appeals), Bombay, set aside the order passed by the Superintendent of Central Excise, holding that the loose cigarettes drawn for test purposes were also subject to assessment based on the length criteria specified in the notification.

3. The Tribunal considered the provisions of Notification No. 14/90-C.E., dated 20-3-1990, which exempted certain cigarettes from excess excise duty based on their length and falling under a specific sub-heading. The duty rates were specified per one thousand cigarettes and were linked to the length of the cigarettes. The Tribunal noted that the condition for duty exemption was that the cigarettes should fall under the specified sub-heading in the Central Excise Tariff.

4. The Revenue argued that Rule 93 of the Central Excise Rules mandated the delivery of excisable tobacco products in packed condition from the factory, and failure to do so would attract the tariff rate of excise duty. However, the Tribunal interpreted Rule 93 to apply to the delivery of products outside the factory, whereas in this case, the loose cigarettes were drawn for internal purposes within the factory for testing and research and were not intended for external delivery.

5. Based on a thorough analysis of the relevant provisions and considering the specific language of Notification No. 14/90-C.E., dated 20-3-1990, the Tribunal upheld the decision of the Collector of Central Excise (Appeals), Bombay. The Tribunal found no merit in the Revenue's appeal and rejected it, concluding that the duty assessment based on the length criteria for loose cigarettes drawn for test purposes and research development within the factory was appropriate under the notification.

This detailed analysis outlines the key legal arguments, interpretations of relevant provisions, and the Tribunal's reasoning leading to the dismissal of the Revenue's appeal in the case.