9911796707
TMI Blog2003 (12) TMI 387X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... iate products, which are captively consumed while manufacturing the final products, namely, carton boxes to claim the benefit of the Notification No. 67/95, dated 16-3-1995. The appellants are engaged in the manufacture of Kraft paper, corrugated paperboard and cartons. They manufacture Kraft paper from waste paper pulp. It is the case of the appellants that Kraft paper is not cleared on payment of duty but is captively consumed. It their case that in terms of Notification No. 67/95, dated 13-3-95, they are not required to add the value of clearances as clarified of the intermediate product while computing the total clearances in terms of Notification No. 6/2000-C.E., dated 19-10-2000 as amended from time to time. They claimed that their qu ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... under any other notification". It is stated that from the above explanation, it is now made clear that the quantum of any clearance which attracted NIL rate of duty or are exempt from whole of excise duty under any other notification had not been taken into account, while determining the quantum of exemption i.e. 3500 MTs under Notification No. 6/2002. 6. It is stated that this explanation has clarified the doubt which was in existence and the explanation is not a new or amending notification but has got retrospective effect. In this regard, the judgment is relied rendered by CBEC in the case of Bharat Metal Industries as reported in 1981 (8) E.L.T. 503 (CBE & C). Further reliance is placed on the following judgments :- (1) & ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... states that for the purpose of removing doubts, the explanation has been added to clarify that the first clearance of an aggregate quantity not exceeding 3500 MTs shall not include clearances of any paper and paper board or articles made therefrom which attract nil rate of duty or are exempt from the whole of excise duty under any other notification. The appellants are manufacturing corrugated board by captively using kraft paper which was manufactured from the paper pulp. The objection raised by Revenue is that the clearances of captive consumption of kraft paper is also required to be taken into consideration while computing the value of clearance of corrugated boards. The explanation which has been added is very explicit and clear and i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... roduced in small units. In the case of Omkar Textile Mills Pvt. Ltd. v. CCE (supra) it has been held that explanation inserted by amending Notification is only clarificatory in nature and it will relate back to the original notification. Likewise, in the case of Sulochana Amma v. Narayanan Nair (supra) it is held that it is a settled law that explanation to a section is not a substantive provision by itself. It is further held that it is entitled to explain the meaning of the words contained in the section or clarify certain ambiguities or clear to them up. It is held that it becomes a part and parcel of the enactment, its meaning must depend upon its terms, sometime, it would be added to include something within it or to exclude from the a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
