9911796707
TMI Blog2008 (11) TMI 6X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ld be entitled to the benefit of exemption contained in notification no.217/86. 3. The respondent assessee M/s National Organic Chemical Industries Limited manufactured ethylene and propylene by cracking raw naphtha in a naphtha cracker. Ethylene and propylene fall under chapter 29 of the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985 (hereinafter referred to as the Tariff Act ). During the process of cracking raw naphtha, gases such as methane and ethane automatically emerge as by-products and is an inevitable consequence of cracking of raw naphtha. Methane and the ethane fall under chapter 27 of the Tariff Act. 4. It is the common case of the parties that a part of the ethylene and propylene manufactured by the aforesaid process is captively consumed by using the same as a refrigerant in the process of separation and to provide external treatment to keep some of the products at low-temperature to prevent their polymerization. The remaining quantity of ethylene and propylene is sold as the final product. 5. The case of the appellant as set out in appeal is as follows: The respondent assessee holds Central Excise Registration for manufacture of excisable goods falling under chapter Nos. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 02.08.1993 January 1993 to May 1993 4 28.12.1993 June 1993 to November 1993 5 29.06.1994 December 1993 to February 1994 11. By order in original dated 12.7.1996, the Commissioner Central Excise, Mumbai-III confirmed the duty demands, imposed penalty and ordered interest for delayed payment of duty but did not order confiscation of land, building, plant, machinery, etc. of the assessee. 12. The appeal filed by the assessee before the Tribunal was allowed by setting aside the order of the Commissioner through the impugned order dated 20.5.2002. 13. Aggrieved by the impugned order rendered by the Tribunal, the Revenue is in appeal before this Court. 14. According to the appellant, the assessee is not entitled to get the benefit of the exemption notification if the inputs manufactured in the factory are captively used for the manufacture of final products not specified in column 3 of the Table annexed to the notification. Chapter heading 27 is not available in column 3 of the T ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... been used in the manufacture of ethylene and propylene. The emergence of ethane and methane is, therefore, by itself is not a ground to deny the benefit of the exemption notification. 20. Mr. K. Radhakrishnan, learned senior advocate appearing for the appellant in support of his submission placed reliance on the case of Novopan India Ltd., Hyderabad v. Collector of Central Excise and Customs, Hyderabad 1994 Supp (3) SCC 606 and submitted that in case of ambiguity the benefit of doubt must go the Revenue. As far as this proposition of law is concerned there is no quarrel, but it has no application to the facts of this case. 21. Reliance has also been placed by Mr. Radhakrishnan on the case of Commissioner of Central Excise, Chandigarh-I v. Mahaan Diaries (2004) 11 SCC 798. In this case, the Court held that in order to claim benefit of a notification, a party must strictly comply with the terms of the notification. If on wording of the notification the benefit is not available then by stretching the words of the notification or by adding words to the notification benefit cannot be conferred. 22. Reliance was also placed on the case of Commissioner of Central Excise, Trichy v ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e on Indian Petrochemicals Corporation Ltd. V. Collector of Central Excise, Vadodara 1997 (92) ELT 294. In this case, this Court observed as under: 19. Under this notification pyrolysis gasolene which falls under chapter 27 is produced in the appellant's factory and it is utilised for the manufacture of goods. As such it would be exempt from the whole of the duty of excise leviable thereon assuming that any duty of excise is leviable on it. Therefore, we fail to see how any duty of excise can be levied on any part of pyrolysis gasolene manufactured in the factory of the appellant. 20. Pyrolysis Gasolene being an intermediate product which is produced in the factory of the appellant, and it being utilised for the manufacture of other goods, it would be totally exempt from payment of excise duty under the second exemption notification. 27. In National Organic Chemical Industries Ltd. V. Collector of Central Excise, Bombay 1997 (89) ELT 643, this Court observed as under: 11. Crude petroleum is refined to produce raw naphtha. Raw naphtha is further refined, or cracked, to produce the said products. This is not controverted. It seems to us to make no difference t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
