9911796707
TMI Blog1999 (10) TMI 278X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ter dated 11-10-1999, requested to decide the matter on merit. We, therefore, heard Shri R.D. Negi, learned SDR, and perused the records. Notification No. 166/86 exempts parts of gas compressors of a kind used in the manufacture of water coolers and parts of water coolers falling under sub-headings 8414.91, 84.18, 8481.80 and 9032.11 of the Schedule to the Central Excise Tariff if such parts are used in the manufacture of compressors or water coolers subject to following the procedure set out in Chapter X of the Central Excise Rules. The appellants have relied upon the decision in the case of Jain Engineering Company v. Collector of Customs - 1987 (32) E.L.T. 3 (S.C.) wherein the Notification No. 281/76-Cus. granted partial exemption from p ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the present matter inasmuch as though the Notification No. 281/76-Cus. partly exempted parts of internal combustion engines, there was no mention at all, of parts under Heading 84.06 which referred only to `Internal Combustion Piston engines' whereas in the present matter, sub-heading 8414.91 specifically refers to parts of gas compressors. The Collector has held as under : "In view of the above, the two cases are quite different, and there can be no difficulty to interpreting Notification No. 166/86. It is as it reads. It is also not, as if, in the event of disallowing the exemption the notification would stand amended. Implicitly, the Honourable Supreme Court was of the view that as the Notification was issued by the Government for part ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... g under Heading 84.06 and parts thereof as the "Intention of the Notification is clear enough to provide that the parts of engine, mentioned under Heading No. 84.06 will get the exemption under the Notification". In the present matter the intention of the Notification is clear enough to provide the exemption to the parts falling under Headings/sub-headings specifically mentioned in the Notification. It has been held by the Supreme Court in Hansraj Gordhandas v. H.H. Dave, Assistant Collector, ECR C 274 (S.C.) that "it is well established that in a taxing statute there is no room for any intendment but regard must be had to the clear meaning. The entire matter is governed wholly by the language of the notification. Accordingly, we do not fin ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
