9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (3) TMI 1119X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... EX., TUTICORIN [2005 (12) TMI 163 - CESTAT, CHENNAI] - benefit allowed - appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant. - C/982/2006, Cross-Objection No: C/CO-13/2007 - A/85962-85963/17/SMB - Dated:- 21-2-2017 - Shri C J Mathew, Member (Technical) Ms. Lakshmi Menon, Advocate for the appellant Shri Ahibaran, Additional Commissioner (AR) for the respondent Per: C J Mathew Appellant, M/s Finolex Cables Ltd are in appeal against order-in-appeal no. GOA/CUS/SNS/13/2006 dated 23 rd May 2006 which upheld the order of the lower authority and relates to the denial of benefit of exemption notification no. 25/2005-Cus dated 1 st March 2005. 2. Appellant manufactures jelly filled telephone cables for which they had imported copper cathode valued at ₹ 1,55,33,929/- vide bill of entry no. 28 dated 1 st June 2005 classifying the cathodes under 7408.1190 and claiming benefit of exemption no. 25/2005-Cus dated 1 st March 2005 at serial no. 33. The said exemption notification entitles them to concessional rate of duty for all goods used in manufacture of goods specified in serial no. 1 to 32 subject to the importer complying with the procedure set out in C ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Excisable Goods) Rules, 1996. Before the introduction of the above Rules in 1996, each Notification was having end use condition and the importer was normally required to produce the end use certificate. However, the above rules were framed as an improvement over the earlier procedure. The above Rules are applicable to an importer who intends to avail of the benefit of an exemption Notification and where the benefit of such exemption is dependent upon the use of imported goods covered by the Notification for the manufactured of any excisable commodity. As per Rule 3 a manufacturer intending to avail the benefit of the exemption notification shall obtain a Registration from the Assistant Commissioner of Central Excise having jurisdiction over his factory. Lower authorities have done their job by a very literal interpretation of Rule 3. Their argument is that the Rule 3 uses the expression his factory . In other words the lower authorities interpret that the importer should own a factory and he has to use the imported material only in his factory. Otherwise, the importer would not be entitled for the concessional assessment under the above Notification. If the importer uses the impo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... wnership of the factory and deny registration for the purposes of the Notification. The Tribunal, in the case of Commissioner of Central Excise, Bangalore v. Electronic Research Ltd. cited by the ld. Advocate, has held that literal meaning of statute should be abandoned if it leads to unjustified results. In that case, goods imported under Concessional rate of duty for Use in one factory were transferred to the factory of the importer at another place under certain circumstances. The Commissioner (Appeals) decided in favour of the importer. Revenue came in appeal before the Tribunal. The Tribunal held that the importer was entitled to exemption as neither the Rules nor the Notifications itself prohibited such transfer. The above decision was held in the context of the Customs (Import of Goods at Concessional Rate of Duty for Manufacture of Excisable Goods) Rules, 1996. The ratio of the above decision is applicable to the present case also. The fact that Chennai Commissionerate has permitted Registration in respect of the importer who does not own the factory where the imported Crude Palm Oil is utilized is also supporting the appellants' case. Hence we allow the appeal with c ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... learned Advocate are very relevant for this appeal. In our view, the Commissioner (A)'s order has no infirmity and Revenue's appeal is devoid of merit. Before parting, we would like to quote the following extract from 'the Closing Chapter' by Lord Dening (Page 97). Sticking to the letter (i) The old way In the middle of the 19 th century the judges spoke of a 'golden rule' by which statutes were to be interpreted according to the grammatical and ordinary sense of the words. Even if it gave rise to unjust results which Parliament never intended, the grammatical meaning must prevail. Although speaking of the grammatical meaning, they took the literal meaning. They stuck to the letter. That is the way in which the Pharisees interpreted the Fourth Commandment about the Sabbath Day. It ordained that on it 'Thou shall do no manner of work.' It so happened that, on the Sabbath Day, as the disciples went through the cornfields, they began, as they went, to pluck the ears of corn. The Pharisees said to Our Lord : 'Behold, why do they on the Sabbath Day that which is not lawful? He replied : 'The Sabbath was made for man, and not man ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
