9911796707
|
Home
Issues:
1. Whether crude sulphur in granular form is exempted from additional duty of Customs in terms of Notification No. 7/92, dated 1-3-1992. Analysis: 1. The appellant argued that the distinction between sulphur in powder form and granular form is artificial and unknown in commercial circles. They contended that granulation is merely an enlargement process, and sulphur powder, when enlarged, takes the form of granules/particles. The appellant also highlighted that subsequent Notification 94/93-C.E., dated 7-9-1993, replaced "sulphur powder" with "sulphur," indicating the intention to include all forms of crude sulphur. They referenced a Tribunal decision to support their argument. 2. The Tribunal analyzed the definitions of "granular" and "powder" and found that neither term was defined in the statute. Referring to the Concise Oxford Dictionary, it noted that powder refers to a mass of dry particles or granules. The Tribunal acknowledged the technical literature presented by the appellant, supporting the claim that granulation is an enlargement process and that sulphur powder can take the form of granules. The Tribunal criticized the Revenue for rejecting this evidence without providing any counter evidence to show that granular form cannot be considered a powder form. 3. Considering the legal position, the Tribunal agreed with the appellant's argument that the subsequent notification substituting "sulphur" for "sulphur powder" in Notification 7/92 should be construed as clarificatory in nature. Citing a previous Tribunal decision and a Supreme Court observation, the Tribunal emphasized interpreting the earlier notification broadly to ascertain the authorities' intention in interpreting the statute. Consequently, the Tribunal found no justification to deny the appellant the benefit of exemption claimed under Notification 7/92 and set aside the impugned order, allowing the appeal with consequential relief, if any.
|
