LexM/S INDIAN OIL CORPORATION LTD. versus COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE, VADODARA
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
[2012) 2 S.C.R. 965
M/S INDIAN OIL CORPORATION LTD.
v.
COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE, VADODARA
(Civil Appeal Nos. 4530-4532 of 2005)
JANUARY 13, 2012
[A.K. PATNAIK AND ANIL R. DAVE, JJ.]
A
B
Central Excise Rules, 1944 -
Chapter X, r. 192 -
Exemption from excise duty - Entitlement to - Reduced
Crude Oil (RCO) - Held: Proviso in the exemption notification
C
made it clear that for availing exemption two conditions were
to be satisfied: First, that it was proved to the satisfaction of
the excise officer that the goods were used for intended use
and second, where such use was elsewhere than in the factory
of production, the procedure set out in Chapter X of the Rules D
was followed - Plea of appellant that if the first condition is
satisfied, exemption has to be granted, not acceptable - RCO
-produced by appellant was not to be used in its factory but at
the place of generation of electricity by the Ahmedabad
Electricity Company Ltd. - Hence, the second condition laid
E
down in the proviso was also to be complied with - Language
of Rule 192 of Chapter X of the Rules clearly provided that
for availing concession from excise duty on excisable goods
used in a specified industrial process, a person must obtain
a registration certificate from the Collector and that "the
F
concession shall, unless renewed by the Collector, cease on
the expiry of the registration certificate"- Registration
certificate of Ahmedabad Electricity Company Ltd. had
expired on 31.12.1995, hence, exemption granted under the
notification ceased on 31. 12. 1995 - Fresh registration G
certificate in favour of the Ahmedabad Electricity Company
Ltd. was issued only on 26. 06. 1996 and such registration was
not for any period prior to 26. 06.1996 - As procedure laid down
in Rule 192 of Chapter X of the Ruies was not complied with,
the appellant was not entitled to avail the exemption of excise
965
H
966
SUPREME COURT REPORTS
[2012) 2 S.C.R.
A duty under the exemption notification during the period from
01.01.1996 to 25.06.1996 -
Exemption Notification -
Notification No. 75184-CE dated 01.03.1984.
•1
Central Excise (Removal of Goods at Concessional Rate
8
of Duty for Manufacture of Excisable Goods) Rules, 2'001 -
r. 3 - Exemption from excise duty - Entitlement to - Naptha
- 1-feld: The exemption notification made it clear that
exemption was to be allowed if it was proved to the Central
Excise Officer having jurisdiction that the goods were cleared
C fo[ the intended use - In addition, there was a further condition
in)he exemption notification that where the intended use was
elsewhere than the factory of production, exemption was to be
allowed if the procedure set out in the 2001 Rules was followed
-;Since in the instant case, the Naphtha produced by the
appellant in its factory was to be used for the manufacture of
D fe{iilizer elsewhere than in its own factory, i.e. in the factory of
lndo Gulf Corporation Limited, exemption could be anowed
onjy if the procedure set out in the 2001 Rules was followed
- ,Rule 3(1) of the 2001 Rules made it amply clear that the
m?riufacturer, who intends to use subject goods for spi~cified
E
us.e at concessional rate of duty, shall make an application
in. ,quadruplicate in the Form at Annexure-1 to the
jurisdictional
Assistant Commissioner or Oeputy
Commissioner of Central Excise, as the case may be - No
suq.h application was made by lndo Gulf Corporation Limited
F
in the form at Annexure-1 to the jurisdictional Assistant
C9mmissioner or Deputy Commissioner of Central Excise -
A~ the procedure set out in the 2001 Rules was not followed,
th!3 appellant was not entitled to exemption on the Ns1phtha
cleared from its factory for supply to lndo Gulf Corporation
G Limited for manufacture of fertilize.r - Exemption Notification
- Notification No. 312001-CE dated 01.03.2001.
~ ,. Two different set of appeals under Section 35L' (b) of
the Central Excise Act, 1944 viz. Civil appeal nos. 4530-
4532 of 2005 and Civil Appeal No.8048 of 2004 came up
H
f I
"·
INDIAN OIL CORPORATION LTD. v. COMMISSIONER OF 967
CENTRAL EXCISE, VADODARA
for consideration before this Court.
Civil appeal nos. 4530-4532 of 2005
A
The appellant in this matter produces inter a/ia
Reduced Crude Oil ("RCO"). By Notification No. 75/84-CE
dated 01.03.1984, the Central government in exercise of B
its powers under Sub-Rule 1 of Rule 8 of the Central
Excise Rules, 1944 exempted certaExcerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.