STANDARD PENCILS (P) LTD. ETC. ETC. versus COLLECTOR OF CENTRAL EXCISE, MADRAS

Citation: [2002] SUPP. 2 S.C.R. 509 · Decided: 19-09-2002 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: S.S.M. QUADRI, S.N. VARIAVA · Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this case
Judgment (excerpt)

J 
STANDARD PENCILS (P) LTD. ETC. ETC. 
A 
v. 
COLLECTOR OF CENTRAL EXCISE, MADRAS 
SEPTEMBER 19, 2002 
[SYED SHAH MOHAMMED QUADRI AND S.N. VARIAVA, JJ.] 
B 
Central Excise Tariff Act, /98j: 
Schedule-Sub-heading 3307.90-Kum-Kum pencil-Levy of excise 
duty-Exemption from-Revenue classifYing Kum-Kum pencil under sub- C 
heading 3304.00-Assessee-manufacturer contending that Kum-Kum pencil 
being a form of Kum-Kum was classifiable under sub-heading 3307.90 and 
was exempt from excise duty under exemption Notification No. 23j/J986-CE 
dated 3.4. 1986 as amended from time to time-Held, Kum-Kum in powder 
form, liquid form, sticker form falls within the meaning 'Kum-Kum-Kum- D 
Kum in pencil form along with other three forms is also available in the 
market and when the Central Government in the Notification has not confined 
the benefit to a particular form or forms, there is no reason to exclude Kum-
Kum in pencil form from the benefit-As a general word 'Kum- Kum' is used 
in the Notification, it will take in all the forms of 'Kum-Kum '-As held by 
the Collector (Appeals), Kum-Kum pencil is one of the form of 'Kum-Kum' E 
and is entitled to benefit of Notification No.23j/J986CE. 
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION : Civil Appeal No. 737 of 1995. 
From the Judgment and Order dated 30.4.1993 of the Central Excise 
Customs and Gold (Control) Appellate Tribunal, New Delhi in E/A. No. 2543 F 
of92-C in F.O. No. 146of1993-C. 
WITH 
C.A. No. 10232 of 1996. 
V. Lakshmikumaran, A.R. Madhav Rao, Alok Yadav and V. Balachandran, G 
for the Appellants. 
Soli J. Sorabjee, Attorney General, Rajiv Nanda and B. Krishna Prasad, 
for the Respondent. 
The following Order of the Court was delivered : 
509 
H 
510 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2002] SUPP. 2 S.C.R. 
A 
Civil Appeal No. 737of1995: 
The short but interesting question that arises in this appeal filed by the 
Manufacturer-assessee from Order No. 146/1993-C in Appeal No. E/2543192-c 
of the Customs, Excise and Gold (Control) Appellate Tribunal dated 30th 
April, 1993, is: whether 'Kum-Kum Pencil' is entitled to the benefit of 
B Notification No. 235/1986-CE dated 3rd April, 1986. 
The assessee manufactures Kum Kum pencil. Notice dated 13th March, 
1991 was issued to the assessee by the Assistant Collector of Central Excise, 
V-Division, Madras to show cause as to why 'Kum-Kum Pencil' should not 
C be classified under Heading 3304.00 of the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985. The 
question that fell for consideration was whether Kum-Kum pencil and eye-
brow pencil are one and the same goods classifiable under Heading 3304.00 
or different goods. Both the Assistant Collector and the Collector (Appeals) 
have held that Kum-Kum Pencil is different arid classifiable under Heading 
3307.00 of the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985. But that gave rise to the next 
D question whether kum-kum pencil would really fall within the meaning of 
'Kum-Kum. On that point also, the original authority and the appellate authority 
found that Kum-Kum Pencil is one of the form of'Kum-Kum' and, therefore, 
it is entitled to the benefit of Notification No. 235/1986-CE. However, the 
Customs, Excise and Gold (Control) Appellate Tribunal (for short, 'the Tribunal'), 
on appeal by the Revenue, held that Kum-Kum in powder form, in liquid form 
E or in. sticker form could be treated as 'Kum-Kum' in common parlance. It 
declined to take Kum-Kum, in pencil form, as falling under the exemption 
granted by the Notification No. 235/1986-C.E. That view is assailed in this 
appeal. 
F 
Notification 235/J 986-CE, as amended by Notification No. 323/1986-C.E. 
dated 22.5.1986, No. 12/1981-C.E. dated 23.1.1987 and No. 48/1988-C.E. dated 
1.3.1988, reads as under: 
"Exemption to Kum Kum and kajal-In exercise of the powers conferred 
by sub-rule (I) of rule 8 of the Central Excise Rules, I 944, the Central 
G 
Government hereby exempts goods of the description specified in 
column (2) of the Table hereto annexed and falling under sub-heading 
No. 3307.90 of the Schedule to the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985 (5 
of 1986), from so much of the duty of excise leviable thereon which 
is specified in the said Schedule as is in excess of the amount 
calculated at the rate specified in the corresponding entry in column 
H 
(3) thereof. 
STANDARD PENCILS (P) LTD. v. C.C.E. 
511 
TABLE 
A 
SI. No. 
Description of goods 
Rate of duty 
(I) 
(2) 
(9) 
I. 
Kum Kum 
Nil 
B 
2. 
Kaja! 
Nil 
3. 
Sindur 
Nil 
4. 
Alta and Mahavar 
Nil 
Indeed, the notificat
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.