9911796707
TMI Blog1980 (5) TMI 36X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... for the manufacture of synthetic rubber are Benzene and Ethyl Alcohol. The process of manufacture which is followed, briefly stated, is that Ethyl Alcohol is first converted into Ethylane, which is reacted with Benzene to form Ethyl Benzene. Ethyl Benzene is then purified and fed to styrene Reactors for conversion into styrene by the process of dehydrogenation in the presence of a catalyst. During a subsequent process of styrene purification by distillation a mixture of Benzene and Toluene gets separated from styrene in the First column. This mixture is not a separate product but is reused for the manufacture of Benzene and Toluene by the petitioner. The petitioner uses Benzene again in the cycle for manufacture of styrene and dispose of T ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... cisions of the Central Government and the Excise Authorities. The contentions have been raised on behalf of the petitioner. The first is that the product Bentol was not removed from the factory premises and no duty of excise was leviable thereon. The second contention is that the product Bentol is not Motor Spirit and in any event no excise duty can be levied on the alleged manufacture of the same. With regard to the first contention it has been stated on behalf of the petitioner that in the application which is filed for obtaining of a licence under Rule 174 of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 a plan of the factory had also been filed. A licence was granted by the Collector but no place of removal, as contemplated by Rule 9, was specified. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... an of its factory. That plan had indicated the exact location of the plant where Bentol was being produced. According to the respondents the moment a licence is granted it would tantamount to specifying the place of manufacture as contemplated by Rule 9. 7. A similar question had come up before this Court in the case of M/s. Modi Carpets Limited v. Union of India - 1980 E.L.T. 320 - (Civil Writ No. 506 of 1979), decided on 16th April, 1980 by this Bench. After referring to Rules 9 and 49, it was held as follows : "Rule 49, it will be seen, makes it clear that payment of duty is required to be made only when the goods are removed from the place or premises specified under Rule 9 or from an approved place of storage. Rule 9, inter alia, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the place of removal. The place of issue need not necessarily be the same as the place of manufacture and the action of issuing is different from the action of manufacture. The action of issuing takes place after the manufacture had been completed. Rule 49 clearly refers to the place of issuing of the manufactured goods. The specification, contemplated by Rule 49, takes place under Rule 9. It is under Rule 9 that a specific order has to be passed by the Collector specifying the place for the purpose of removal. This is evident from the following words used in the Rule :- "which may be specified by the Collector in this behalf." It is evident that if the argument of the respondents was correct then these words would be wholly unnecessary ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
