LexCOMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE, CHENNAI versus M/S. NEBULAE HEALTH CARE LTD.
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
[2015] 12 S.C.R. 395 COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE, CHENNAI A v. M/S. NEBULAE HEALTH CARE LTD. (Civil Appeal No. 2789 OF 2007) OCTOBER 27, 2015 [A.K. SIKRI AND ROHINTON FALi NARIMAN, JJ.] B Central Excise Act, 1944: SS/ Notifications - Notification no.811999, 812000, 812001, 812002, 812003 - C Held: Benefit of MODVATICENVAT credit in respect of branded goods of third parties manufactured by assessee on job work basis would not disentitle him from availing benefit of SS/ Notifications for goods manufactured by them 0 on their own account. Dismissing the appeals, the Court HELD: 1. For availing the benefit of Notification by an SSI Unit, the clearances for home consumption only E are to be taken into consideration, except in those cases where it is clearly provided otherwise. For this purpose, clearances bearing the brand narne or trade name of third parties are concerned, they are kept outside the scheme inasmuch as: (a) they are not to be included for F determining the aggregate value of the clearances for home consumption; and (b) such products bearing brand names or trade names of third parties, even if manufactured by the SSI Unit, are not eligible for any exemption and excise duty thereupon has to be paid. It G becomes apparent that so far as manufacture of branded goods of third party on job work basis by the SSI Unit is concerned, they are to be dealt with differently in the sense that they do not come within the ambit of H 395 396 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2015] 12 S.C.R. A exemption on which normally excise duty, as per the provisions of the Central Excise Act, is payable. As a sequitur, it also follows that once excise duty is paid by the manufacturer on such branded goods manufactured, the brand name whereof belongs to another person, on B job work basis, the 551 Unit would be entitled to CENVAT/ MODVAT credit on the inputs which were used for manufacture of such goods as on those inputs also excise duty was paid.These branded goods manufactured by the 551 Units meant for third parties C are regulated by the normal provisions of excise law and will have no bearing or relevance insofar as availing the benefit of those exemption notifications in respect of its own products manufactured by the 551 Units is 0 concerned. The Tribunal in the impugned decisions in both these appeals has decided the issue correctly. [Paras 17, 18] [419-B-H; 420-A] E F G H Commissioner of Central Excise, Ahmedabad v. Ramesh Food Products 2004 (174) E.L.T. 310 (5.C.); Faridabad Tools Pvt. Ltd. v. Collectorof Central Excise 1993 (63) E.L.T. 759; Kamani Food v. Collector of Central Excise 1995 (75) E.L.T. 202; Kharia Cement Works v. Collector of Central Excise 1989 (42) ELT 696 (Tribunal) - referred to. Case Law Reference 2004 (174) E.L.T. 310 (5.C.) referred to. Para 13 1993 (63) E.L.T. 759 referred to. Para 13 1995 (75) E.L.T. 202 referred to. . Para 13 1989 (42) ELT 696 9Tribunal referred to. Para 15 CMMNR. OF CENTRAL EXCISE, CHENNAI v. NEBULAE 397 HEALTH CARE LTD. CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Civil Appeal No. A 2789 of2007 From the Judgment and Order No. 829/06 dated 22.08.2006 of the Customs Excise & Service Tax Appellate Tribunal, South Zonal Bench, Chennai in Appeal No. E/1034/ B 05 WITH C.A. No. 1142 of2009 c . ~- _,. A.K, Sanghi, P. K. Mullick, Binu Tamta, Rajiv Singh, B. Krishna Prasad, Soma Mullick for the Appellant. S. Jai Kumar, t-likhil Nayyar, N. Sai Vinod, Aparna Hirandagi, Sandeep Narain,Ashok Bannidinni, M. H. Patil, M/ D s. S. Narain & Co. for the Respondent. The Judgment of the Court was delivered by A.K. SIKRI, J. 1. Delay condoned. E 2.These appeals raise an issue of eligibility of concession/exemption from excise duty that is provided under Notification nos. 8/1999, 8/2000, 8/2001, 8/2002 and 8/2003 to the Small Scale Industrial Units (for short, 'SSI Units'). It is not in dispute that the respondents - assessees in these F appeals fulfill eligibility conditions for availing the benefit of SSI exemption under the aforesaid Notifications. However, in addition to manufacturing goods on their own account, they are also doing job work of manufacturing goods of certain other G parties on job work basis. The goods manufactured for third parties bear the brand name of those third parties and in respect of such goods manufactured for third parties, the assessees paid the normal duty of excise but atthe same tim
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.