Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

Home Case Index All Cases Central Excise Central Excise + SC Central Excise - 2005 (3) TMI SC This

  • Login
  • Cases Cited
  • Referred In
  • Summary

Forgot password       New User/ Regiser

⇒ Register to get Live Demo



 

2005 (3) TMI 137 - SC - Central Excise


Issues: Classification under Notification No. 64/88 for cement blocks, slabs, and lintels.

Classification under Notification No. 64/88:
The case involved the classification of cement blocks, slabs, and lintels under Tariff Item No. 68.07 for benefit under Notification No. 64/88. The Notification provided a concessional rate of duty for goods constituting intermediates or components of pre-fabricated buildings falling under specific headings. The dispute arose when the Revenue contended that the Appellants' goods did not qualify as intermediates or components of pre-fabricated buildings as per the Notification's clear language.

Interpretation of Notification:
The Supreme Court emphasized that the plain language of a notification must be adhered to when interpreting its scope. The Court held that the concessional rate of duty was exclusively available to items like concrete beams and stairs, which constituted intermediates or components of pre-fabricated buildings. The Court rejected the argument that blocks, slabs, and lintels could individually qualify for the benefit without being intermediaries or components of pre-fabricated buildings. The absence of a specific distinction in the Notification indicated that all items listed must serve as intermediaries or components of pre-fabricated buildings to qualify.

Analysis of Tribunal's Decision:
The Tribunal ruled against the Appellants, denying them the benefit of the Notification. The Court upheld the Tribunal's decision, stating that the Collector's order in favor of the Appellants was erroneous. The Collector's reasoning, based on the use of blocks in pre-fabricated buildings and ISI specifications, was deemed flawed. The Court highlighted that the Department's case was clear that the goods did not constitute intermediates or components of pre-fabricated buildings, contrary to the Collector's interpretation. Merely meeting ISI specifications did not automatically entitle blocks to the Notification's benefit if they did not serve as intermediaries or components of pre-fabricated buildings.

Final Decision:
The Supreme Court found no fault with the Tribunal's decision and dismissed the Appeal. The Court declined to interfere with the Tribunal's ruling, emphasizing that the Collector's order was erroneous and rightly set aside. The Appellants were not entitled to the benefit under Notification No. 64/88 for their cement blocks, slabs, and lintels. No costs were awarded in the case.

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates