9911796707
TMI Blog1994 (1) TMI 284X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d passed two different orders-in-original in respect of the appellants denying the benefit of Notification No. 178/88-C.E., dated 13-5-1988 and also had held that as the appellants had used zinc as one of the inputs which do not fall within Chapter 74 of Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985. The appellants had urged before the Collector that the Notification in question nowhere impliedly suggested that in order to avail the benefit granted by the said notification, the concerned sheets/circles are to be manufactured exclusively out of the prescribed inputs and addition of any other input in admixture shall be a bar in the matter of availing the benefit. The second point urged before the ld. Collector was that the benefit cannot be denied the no ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ological definition of Copper and Articles thereof, Chapter 74 . It was further submitted that such definition as per Explanatory Notes on Harmonized Commodity Description and Coding System also supports thereto. Ld. Advocate referred to the order-in-original dated 7-7-1982 passed by the Asstt. Collector who had granted the benefit of notification to them and therefore, the subsequent order is not justified. Referring to the notification in question, the ld. Advocate pointed out that the concession was available to copper circles and sheets provided such sheets and circles are made from `copper and articles thereof falling under Chapter 74 on which duty had already been paid and no credit either under Rule 56A or Rule 57A had been availed ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... or duty paid virgin copper. He relied on Note 3 of Section XV pertaining to Chapter 74 which stated the Copper Base Metal alloys which may be classified with copper include a copper zinc base alloys (Brasses) in variable proportions of Copper and Zinc e..g. common brass......... He also referred to the Notification No. 76/85-C.E., dated 17-2-1985 which also stated that the expression `Brass means a Copper alloy having a Zinc content of 5% or more by weight. Ld. Advocate also drew strength from the circular dated 20-2-1982 issued by Central Board of Excise Customs which [has] clarified that addition of other metals such as zinc, lead, tin etc. is technologically necessary before various articles could be manufactured and that it w ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... , as is in excess of the amount calculated at the rate specified in the corresponding entry in column (4) of the said Table. THE TABLE S. No. Heading No./Sub-heading No. Description of goods Rate 01. 7401.10 7401.20 74.02, 74.03 Copper mattes, cement copper (precipitated copper); unrefined copper; copper anodes for electrolytic refining; refined copper and copper alloys, unwrought; and cast circles of copper. Nil 02. 7407.12 Wrought bars and rods of brass Nil 03. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e duty has already been paid. Notification No. 178/88-C.E., dated 13-5-1988). On a perusal of this notification, it is clear that there is no dispute with regard to the notification the final product. The only dispute raised by the lower authorities with regard to the term `copper . The ld. Asstt. Collector has proceeded on the basis that the term `inputs falling within Chapter 74 of the notification implies within order to be eligible for availing exemption under the said notification, the said goods are necessarily required to be manufactured exclusively out of inputs falling within Chapter 74. Ld. Asstt. Collector has proceeded that the interpretation of the notification has to be done strictly and by such strict application, the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... is issue before the higher forums. Therefore, it follows that the aspect of use of other ingredients in the manufacture of copper (Brass) sheet and circles is a technological necessity and such use does not preclude the appellants from seeking the benefit of the notification in question. The notification has to be interpretted in such a manner as not to make otiose and deterrent. In the present case, the appellants had been enjoying the benefit from 1982 onwards. The Asstt. Collector had already passed order-in-original in their favour by his order dated 7-7-1982. The deptt. had not appealed against this order. Therefore, to reagitate the issue, the Revenue should point out any change in the state of affairs to deny the benefit. In this par ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
