M/S INDCON STRUCTURALS (P) LTD. versus COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE, CHENNAI

Citation: [2006] SUPP. 1 S.C.R. 11 · Decided: 17-04-2006 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: ASHOK BHAN · Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed

Judgment (excerpt)

+ 
A 
MIS INDCON STRUCTURALS (P) LTD. 
v. 
COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE, CHENNAI 
APRIL 17, 2006 
B 
[ASHOK BHAN AND LOKESHWAR SfNGH PANT A, JJ.] 
Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944/Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985-
Section 5A(J)/Tariff sub-heading 6807-00--Notification No. 59190-CE dated c 
20.3.1990 extending 15% ad valorem duty on all products falling under 
Heading 68. 07 except floor covering in rolls or in form of tiles--Assessee 
manufacturing cement tiles-Entitlement to benefit under the Notification--
Held: Jn the facts of the case, since the tiles in question are not akin to floor 
covering material and are covered under the nomenclature of 'floor tiles, ' the 
assessee is entitled to the benefits of the Notification. 
D 
Interpretation of Statutes: 
Taxing statutes-Interpretation of-Held: Words and expressions in 
taxing statutes, unless defined in the statu/e itself. have to be construed in 
·1 
the sense in which the person dealing with them understand i.e. as per trade E 
understanding, commercial and technical practice and usage. 
By Notification No. 59/90-CE dated 20.3.90 effective rate of duty of 15% 
ad valorem was extended to all products falling under Heading 68.07 of 
Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985, but the floor coverings in rolls or in the 
F 
~ 
form of tiles were excluded. The assessee-company, manufacturer of flooring 
cement tiles claimed benefit of the Notification on the ground that the tiles 
in question were not floor coverings in rolls or in the form of tiles and the 
same was the floor itself. 
Adjudicating Authority after considering certificates of Architects, G 
Engineers, Town Planners, Interior Design Engineers and Consultants, and 
' 
after on-the-spot inspection of the factory premises, concluded that the goods 
.. 
in issue were covered under sub-heading 67/807.00 and hence the assessee 
was entitled to the Exemption Notification Order of adjudicating authority was 
I 
upheld by·appellate authority. In appeal to CEGAT, after difference of opiniun 
II 
H 
12 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS (2006] SUPP. I S.C.R. 
A on the issue, third member denied the benefit of Exemption Notification to the 
assessee. Hence the present appeal. 
Allowing the appeal, the Court 
HELD: I. In the facts and circumstances of the case, as per the trade 
B understanding and usages, cement tiles, the subject-matter of the present case, 
is a form of floor itself and, therefore, entitled to the benefit of Exemption 
Notification No. 59/1990. I 17-E-F] 
2. On close examination of the entire material on record, the 
adjudicating authority has come to the definite conclusion that the cement 
C tiles manufactured by the assessee-company are in no way akin ~o floor 
covering materials and these are covered within the nomenclature of 'floor 
tiles' and, therefore, the assessee-Company is entitled to the benefit of 
Exemption Notification No. 59/90. (16-0-E( 
3. The words and expressions in taxing statutes, unless defined in the 
D statute itself, have to be construed in the sense in which the persons dealing 
with them understand, i.e., as per the trade understanding, commercial and 
technical practice and usage. The expressions "floor coverings in rolls or in 
the form of tiles" are not defined in the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944 
or in the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985 or in the Exemption Notification No. 
E 59/90, but it has acquired a definite trade and business understanding. 
(15-C-EJ 
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Civil Appeal No. 1489 of2001. 
Under Sec. 35 L(b) of the Customs, Excise & Gold (Control) Appellate 
Tribunal, Chennai in Final Order No. E/1557 /2000 dated 14.11.2000 in Appeal 
F No. E/1557/94-D/MD. 
V. Lakshniikumaran, Alok Yadav and Karan Talwar (for V. Balachandran) 
for the Appellant. 
B. Dutta and ASG Rupesh Kumar (for P. Parmeswaran) for the 
G Respondent. 
H 
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by 
LOKESHWAR SINGH PANTA, J. This Statutory Appeal is filed by 
M/s lndcon Structurals (P) Limited under Section 35L(b) of the Central Excise -
Act, 1944 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act") against the Final Order No. 
• 
' • 
INDCONSTRUCTURALS(P)LTD. v. C.C.E. [LOKESHWARSINGHPANTA,J.] ]3 
1557 /2000 dated 14th November, 2000 of the Customs, Excise and Gold (Control) A 
Appellate Tribunal (for short "the CEGAT"), Chennai, in appeal No. E/1554/ 
94-D-MD, setting aside the Order dated 16th May, 1994 recorded by the 
Collector of Central Excise (Appeals), Madras. 
The appellant-Company is

Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.