LexSODANI CEMENT AND CHEMICALS (P) LTD. versus COLLECTOR OF CENTRAL EXCISE, JAIPUR
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
A SODA NI CEMENT AND CHEMICALS (P) LTD. V. COLLECTOR OF CENTRAL EXCISE, JAIPUR SEPTEMBER I 0, 2002 B [SYED SHAH MOHAMMED QUADRI AND S.N. VARIAVA JJ.] Central Excises Act, 1944: S.5-A(l)-Exemption Notification No. 2311989-CE dt. 1-3-1989-Small C Scale 1ndus1ry--Manufacturing Portland cement classified under sub-heading 2502.20 of Schedule to Central Excise Tariff Act-Excise authorities and Tribunal declining to give benefit of the Notification-Held, an S.S./ unit being exempt under Industries (Developmenl and Regulation) Ac/, 1951 is not required to have licensed production capacity-There being no controversy D about 1he fulfilment of other requirements of the No1ification by Lhe appellanl- manufaclurer, Portland cement manufactured by it is enti//ed to the benefit of the Nolification--Requiremenls of Notification explained-Authorities directed to extend benefit of exemption Notification to the cement manufac/ured by 1he appellanl-manufacturer-Cenlral Excise Tariff Act, 1985-Sub-heading 2502.20-Portland cement-Classification of E CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Civil Appeal Nos. 537-38 of 1994. From the Judgment and Order dated 29.10.1993 of the Customs Excise & Gold (Control) Appellate Tribunal New Delhi in E. Appeal No. F 2155192-C with E-3058/92-C. Ramesh Singh, P.S. Sudheer and K.J. John, for the Appellant. Rajiv Nanda and B. Krishna Prasad, for the Respond~nt. G The following Order of the Court was delivered H In these appeals, challenge is made to the judgment and order of the Customs, Excise and Gold (Control) Appellate Tribunal in E/Appeal No. 2155/92-C with E/3058/92-C dated 29th October, 1993. The short question that arises for consideration is whether the cement 220 - , SODANI CEMENT AND CHEMICALS (P) LTD. v. C.C.E. 221 manufactured by the appellant is entitled to the benefit of the exemption A notification, No. 23/.1989-CE dated I st March, 1989, issued by the Central Government under sub-section (I) of Section 5-A of the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944, [for short, 'the notification'] The appellant is a small scale industry. It manufactures ordinary Portland cement, which is classified under sub- heading 2502.20 of the Schedule to B the Central excise Tariff Act, 1985. The excise duty leviable under that sub- heading is Rs. 215 per metric tonne. However, 'cement' falling under the said sub- heading, if entitled to evil the benefit of the notification, would be liable to excise duty at the reduced rate of Rs. I I 5 per metric tonne. The Excise authorities as well as the Tribunal held that the cement manufactured C by the appellant was not entitled to the benefit of the said notification; so the appellant is in appeal before this Court. It would be apt to read the said notification here: "G.S.R. In exercise of the powers conferred by sub-section (I) of D Section 5A of the Central Excise and Salt Act, 1944 (I of 1944 ), the Central government being satisfied that it is necessary in the public interest so to do, hereby exempts cement falling under sub-heading No. 2502.02 of the schedule to the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985 (5 of 1986) and manufactured in a factory using vertical shaft kiln with the total licensed capacity as certified by the Director of Industries E in the State Government or the Development Commissioner for Cement in the Government of India, Ministry of Industry not exceeding 200 tonnes per day, from so much of the duty of excise leviable thereon under the said schedule as in excess of the amount calculated at the rate of Rs. I 15 per tonne. Provided that nothing contained in this notification shall apply to such cement in respect of which a manufacturer avails of the exemption contained in the notification of the Government of India in the Ministry of Finance (Department of Revenue) No. I 75/86- Central Excise date 1st March, I 986" F G A perusal of the notification shows that, on fulfilment of the following requirements, cement, irrespective of who is the manufacturer, would be covered by the said notification if: (I) cement in question is classified under sub-heading 2502.20 of the Schedule to the Central Excise Tariff Act, (2) such cement is manufactured in a factory using vertical shaft kiln, (3) the H 222 SUPREME COURT REPORTS (2002) SUPP. 2 S.C.R. A total licenced capacity of the kiln is not exceeding 200 tonnes per day, and (4) the afore-mentioned requirements must be certified by the Director of lndust
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.