9911796707
TMI Blog1998 (10) TMI 177X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ppeals related to duty demand on goods obtained by the breaking of barges . The demand had been made on the basis of Tariff sub-heading 72.15. The contention of the appellants is that barges are not ships or boats or other floating structures . They have specifically drawn attention to Chapter sub-heading 89.01 which refers to barges as distinct from cruise ships, excursion boats, ferry-boats, cargo ships, and similar vessels for the transport of persons or goods. Ld. Counsel contended that if the intention of the legislature was to include the goods and materials obtained by breaking up of barges also in Heading 72.15 it would have been specifically so provided in that Heading. In view of the clear distinction made between ships/boats ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of the statute or statutory instrument understand it. He further referred to another judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of Indian Aluminium Cables Ltd. v. U.O.I. Others [1985 (21) E.L.T. 3 (S.C.)] in which the Apex Court had observed that in determining the meaning or connotation of words and expressions describing an article in a Tariff Schedule, one principle which was fairly well settled was that those words and expressions should be construed in the sense in which they are understood in the trade, by the dealers and the consumers. Reliance was also placed on the Tribunal judgment in Sociedade De Fomento Others v. Collector of Customs, Bombay [1987 (27) E.L.T. 620], in which this Tribunal had held that in construing a taxing s ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... y of cutting has not been included as a manufacturing activity in any of the Chapter Notes or Section Notes. In this connection, he referred to the Tribunal decision in SAIL v. Collector of Customs as reported in 1991 (54) E.L.T. 414 in wich the question whether the crushing of lime stone was considered in the context of Section2(f) of the Central Excise Act. Ld. Counsel referred to paragraphs 23 to 26 of the said judgment in which the Tribunal had listed out Chapter Notes under various chapters in the Central Excise Tariff in which various activities which amount to manufacture had been clearly spelt out. This was done obviously for the reason that the definition of Section 2(f) would not fully cover said activities. If the intention of th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... thereafter liable to observe the necessary procedure under the Central Excise Act by way of obtaining licence, filing of returns and other procedures. There was no question of any person entertaining any bona fide belief about the duty liability in relation to the activity of breaking up of ships/barges after the enactment of Central Excise Tarrif Act. Therefore, the appellants were under law required to obtain the necessary licence and inform the authorities about their activity of breaking of barges. In failing to do so, they have suppressed the information from the Department and the extended period of limitation for demanding duty under Section 11A had been rightly invoked. 5. As regards the submission made by ld. Counsel for the app ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... would be observed from the above extracts, Tariff sub-heading 7215.00 clearly identifies goods and materials obtained by breaking up of ships, boats and other floating structures as leviable to duty at the rate of Rs. 1,800/- per tonne. The words ships and boats and other floating structures are almost entirely a repetition of the heading given under Chapter 89 which reads as ships, boats and other floating structures . Further, Chapter sub-heading 8901.00 includes cruise ships, excursion boats, ferry-boats, cargo ships, barges and similar vessels for transport of persons or goods. Ld. Counsel had sumitted that since barges have been separately mentioned side by side with cruise ships, excursion boats etc., this would clearly show the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... in the face of the said provision cannot be taken as a bona fide belief. As regards the submission made by ld. Counsel that if the activity of breaking up of ships were to be considered a manufacturing activity, a separate Chapter Note/Section Note on the lines of such clarificatory notes in various other Chapters/Sections should have been given, we are of the view that the entries against Chapter sub-heading 7215.00 does not give rise to any scope for doubt as to whether the said acitivity was an excisable activity or not. When Tariff sub-heading 72.15 clearly speaks of breaking up of ships as an excisable event, no argument that the said activity is not a `manufacture in terms of Section 2(f) of the Act can be accepted. 9. As regards ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
