9911796707
TMI Blog1985 (10) TMI 215X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ole of duty of excise leviable thereon, if such rapidogens are manufactured from other dyes on which Excise Duty or Countervailing Customs Duty, as the case may be, has already been paid. The petitioners filed a classification list under Rule 173-B of the Central Excise Rules, 1944, claiming the exemption under this Notification. This was considered and duly approved by the department. Separately, the Government issued another Notification No. 71/78-CE dated 1-3-1978, which exempted synthetic organic dyestuffs (including pigment dye stuff) and synthetic organic derivatives used in any dyeing process, to the extent of first clearances for home consumption upto an aggregate value not exceeding Rs. 5 lakhs and cleared on or after the 1st day of April, by or on behalf of manufacturer, from one or more factories, from the whole of Excise Duty leviable thereon. The petitioners filed a classification list for claiming exemption under this Notification also and this was also duly considered and approved by the proper officer of the Central Excise Department. Availing of the exemptions, afforded under these two Notifications, the appellants, during the period from April, 1978, to November, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tled to avail of their benefit separately, unless there is any specific provision to the contrary. No explanation incorporated under Notification No. 71/78 restricted its scope with reference to the earlier Notification No. 180/61. It is further claimed that, as a result of subsequent amending Notification No. 141/79 dated 30th March, 1979, it was made abundantly clear that, for purposes of computing aggregate value of clearances under Notification No. 71/78 dated 1st March, 1978, the clearances of the specified goods, which are exempted from the whole of duty of Excise, leviable thereon by another Notification, issued under sub-rule 1 of Rule 8 of the Central Excise Rules, 1944, and for the time being in force, shall not be taken into account. It is pointed out that this explanation was obviously of a clarificatory nature and should be considered to have retrospective applicability in understanding the import and meaning of Notification No. 71/78. One other point made on behalf of the appellants is that even if the demand of duty were otherwise sustainable, there is an error of computation as it is based on cum-duty value of all clearances. It is pleaded that should the Tribunal b ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... efore, have retrospective effect, is stoutly opposed. It is stated that Notification No. 141/79 enlarges the scope of exemptions under the two notifications and as such extension of the benefit of an exemption can only be prospective and it cannot have retrospective effect. 6. We have carefully considered the facts of the case and the submissions made on both sides, both written and oral. For a proper appreciation of these submissions and case of reference, it is necessary to re-produce here the three Notifications, in question, i.e. No. 71/78-CE dated 1-3-1978 (the schedule to this Notification is a long one and it is being omitted. Suffice it to say that No. 9 of this Schedule refers to Synthetic Organic Dyestuff, including pigment dyestuff, or synthetic organic derivatives, used in any dye process), Notification No. 180/61-CE dated 23-11-1961 and Notification No. 141/79-CE dated 31-3-1979. Notification No. 71/78 dated 1-3-1978 In exercise of the powers conferred by sub-rule (1) of rule 8 of the Central Excise Rules, 1944, the Central Government hereby exempts the excisable goods of the description specified in column (3) of the Table hereto annexed (hereinafter referred to ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... - (i) the quantity of any other material used shall not exceed one third in weight of the total weight of the ingredients. (ii) such board shall not be specially compressed and shall not have any paper pasted on either surface. Explanation III. - For the purposes of determining the value of clearances under this notification - (i) in respect of goods of the description specified against serial number 6 of the said Table, - (a) the value of goods on which duty is exempted under the notification of the Government of India in the Ministry of Finance (Department of Revenue and Insurance) No. 114/73-Central Excises, dated the 30th April, 1973, shall not be taken into account; (b) the value of the said goods manufactured without the aid of power shall not be taken into account; (ii) in respect of goods of the description specified against serial number 12 of the said Table, the value of perfumed hair oils mentioned at serial number 2 of the Table annexed to the notification of the Government of India in the Ministry of Finance (Department of Revenue and Insurance) No. 63/71-Central Excises, dated the 29th May, 1971 on which duty is exempted subject to the condition specifi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ect of goods of the description specified against serial number 51 of the said Table, the value of goods on which duty is exempted under the notification of the Government of India in the Ministry of Finance (Department of Revenue and Insurance) No. 99/70-Central Excises, dated the 1st May, 1970, shall not be taken into account. 2. Nothing contained in this notification shall, in so far as goods of the description specified against serial number 41 of the said Table, apply to manufacturers of such goods who avail of the exemption under the notification of the Government of India in the Ministry of Finance (Department of Revenue and Insurance) No. 101/71-Central Excises, dated the 29th May, 1971, or under the notification of the Government of India in the Ministry of Finance (Department of Revenue and Insurance) No. 153/71-Central Excises, dated the 26th July, 1971. 3. This notification shall come into force on the 1st day of April, 1978". Notification No. 180/61 -CE, dated 23-11-1961. In exercise of the powers conferred by Rule 8(1) of the Central Excise Rules, 1944, the Central Government hereby exempts Dyes specified in the Schedule annexed hereto from the whole of the du ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ions. Notification No. 180/61 dated 23-11-1961 exempts rapidogens from the whole of duty of excise leviable thereon if such dyes are manufactured from any other dye on which Excise Duty or Countervailing Customs Duty has already been paid. On the other hand. Notification No. 71/78 dated 1-3-1978 grants exemption in respect of the first clearance of the excisable goods in question for home consumption upto an aggregate value not exceeding Rs. five lakhs, subject to certain specified conditions and explanations. It has been argued that in interpreting these notifications we should go by the meaning available from the plain reading of the. notifications as they stand. It is added that if these exemptions have been granted separately, the benefit thereunder should be available to them separately unless there is any specific provisions to the contrary. This again by itself, is not a proposition that can be disputed. Nevertheless, the whole point at issue in this matter hinges on problems which arise in interpretation of Notification No. 71/78 dated 1-3-1978 where an assessee is. already availing of Notification No. 180/61 dated 23-11-1961 inasmuch as the question has been raised that t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... exempted from the whole of duty of excise leviable thereon by any other notification issued under sub-rule (1) of Rule 8 of the Central Excise Rules, 1944, and for the time being in force, shall not be taken into account and pointed out that this explanation was obviously of a clarificatory nature, which should be considered to have retrospective applicability in understanding the import and meaning of Notification No. 71/78. This argument is not, at all, acceptable for the reason that it is by now well established that such exemption notifications always have prospective effect and not retrospective effect. In particular, any exemption notification, which enlarges the scope of an earlier notification, cannot, unless there is a specific provision to the contrary, be considered to be of a clarificatory nature. It is further claimed by the appellants by reference to the decision in the case of Bombay Paints and Allied Products Limited (supra) that while fiscal statutes must be strictly construed, where there is any doubt the benefit of it must go to the assessee so that the tax burden is lessened. This principle, again, may not be disputed or debated upon here for the reason that, i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
