9911796707
TMI Blog1988 (2) TMI 68X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sued by the second respondent pursuant to powers under Rule 8(1) of the Central Excise Rules, 1944, hereinafter referred to as the Rules, the said notification as amended by a subsequent Notification No. 139/81-C.E. dated 2-7-1981 in relation to clauses (i), (v) and (vi) found therein. These clauses relate to the processes of box making, labelling and bandrolling and packaging. The only point urge ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he process of manufacturing and this is exactly re-counted in the impugned Notification No. 41/81-C.E. dated 1-3-1981. This construction on Rule 8(1) of the Rules put forth by the learned counsel for the petitioner could not have the support of the explicit language of the rule. Rule 8(1) of the Rules reads as follows :- "The Central Government, may, from time to time, by notification in the Off ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... reasoning that these processes would not amount to manufacturing processes, there could be an exercise of power of exemption under Rule 8(1) of the Rules. Rule 8(1) of the Rules confers wide discretionary powers on the Central Government in the matter of granting exemption. Any particular order of exemption could be questioned only when it is contrary to the provisions of the Central Excises and ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ification, yet they could be processes enjoined by the other rules to be adopted for disposal of finished matches, and hence they could not be stated to be wholly not germane or foreign to the excisable item, nameiy, matches. 2. Mr. T.Somasundaram, learned Additional Central Government Standing Counsel appearing for the respondents, would submit the processes referred to in clauses (i), (v) and ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
