SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

1995 Supreme(SC) 388

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
J.S. Verma, S.P. Bharucha and K.S. Paripoornan, JJ.
Civil Appeal Nos. 1315-18 of 1990, 2291-95, 3476 of 1991, 295 of 1992, 3780-85, 3786-87, 3814, 3845, 3866, 5195 and 6035 of 1993, 2543 and 3977-4020 of 1994 and SLP Nos. 7687, 8053, 9139, 12767 and 21832 of 1994
Decided On: 20.03.1995
Collector of Central Excise, Shillong Appellants
Vs.
Wood Craft Products Ltd. Respondent
Counsel for the Parties
For Appearing parties: Joseph Vellapally, J.P. Bhattacharjee, P. Chidambaram, K.K. Venugopal, H.N. Salve and P.K. Goswani, Senior Advs., A.K. Srivastava, V.K. Verma, D.S. Mahra, N.R. Choudhary, Som Nath Mukherjee, M.L. Lahoty, Shipra Khazanchi, P.S. Jha, Atishi Dipankar, P.P. Tripathi, D.N. Mehta, Meera Aggarwal and R.C. Mishra, Advs. for Aggarwal & Mishra Co. and Khaitan & Co., Narendra Kaushik, A.K. Sharma, Kailash Vasdev and M.P. Shorawala, Advs.

Advocates:
A.K.SHARMA, A.K.SRIVASTAVA, ATISHI DIPANKAR, D.N.MEHTA, D.S.Mahra, HARISH N.SLAVE, J.P.BHATTACHARJI, JOSEPH VELLAPALLY, K.K.VENUGOPAL, KAILASH VASUDEV, M.L.Lahoty, M.P.SHORAVALA, MIRA AGRAWAL, N.R.CHAUDHARY, NARENDER KAUSHIK, P.CHAUDHARY, P.K.GOSWAMI, P.P.TRIPATHI, P.S.JHA, R.C.MISHRA, SHIPRA KHAJANCHI, SOM NATH MUKHERJI, V.K.VARMA

Headnote:

Central Excise Tariff Bill, 1985 - Central Excise duty – Tariffs - Whether "block boards" are to be classified under Heading, Sub-heading as claimed by revenue or under Heading Sub-heading as claimed by manufacturers of block boards - Controversy relates to three periods - Division into three periods is on account of fact that an amended Chapter Note 5 in Chapter 44 was introduced w.e.f. 19.3.1990 on account of controversy which had been raised about classification of block boards and, thereafter, w.e.f. 1.3.1992 a second amendment was made in Chapter Note 5 on account of the surviving controversy even after amendment made w.e.f. 19.3.1990 - These appeals and the connected matters relate to these three periods - Held, In HSN, block board is included within meaning of expression "similar laminated wood" in same context of classificaiton of block board - Since Act, 1985 is enacted on basis and pattern of the HSN, same expression used in Act must, as far as practicable, be construed to have meaning which is expresssly givne to it in HSN when there is no indication in the Indian tariff of a different intention - In our opinion, expression "similar laminated wood" in Heading as it stood from the beginning must be construed to include within it block boards of all kind so that amendment in Chapter Note 5 w.e.f. 19.3.1990 and thereafter w.e.f. 1.3.1992 merely clarified and made explicit which was implicit in heading throughout - Result is that decision of Tribunal reported in 1992 (60) E.L.T. 668 and that to High Court in 1993 (66) E.L.T. 345 are reversed, while decision of High Court for third period commencing from 1.3.1992 is affirmed even though for different reasons given herein - All appeals of revenue are allowed while appeals and SLPs of manufacturers are dismissed.

JUDGMENT

J.S. Verma, J.

1. The main question for decision in these appeals and the connected matters is whether "block boards" are to be classified under Heading No. 44.08, Sub-heading No. 4408.90 as claimed by the revenue or under Heading No. 44.10, Sub-heading No. 4410.90 as claimed by the manufacturers of block boards. The controversy relates to three periods, namely, from 28.2.1986 to 19.3.1990, from 20.3.1990 to 28.2.1992 and from 1.3.1992 onwards. The division into three periods is on account of the fact that an amended Chapter Note 5 in Chapter 44 was introduced w.e.f. 19.3.1990 on account of the controversy which had been raised about the classification of block boards and, thereafter, w.e.f. 1.3.1992 a second amendment was made in Chapter Note 5 on account of the surviving controversy even after the amendment made w.e.f. 19.3.1990. These appeals and the connected matters relate to these three periods.

2. For the first period, the Tribunal held in the main judgment dated 18.10.1989 reported in 1992 (60) E.L.T. 668 that block board does not fall within Heading No. 44.08, Sub-heading 4408.90 and the more appropriate classificaiton would be under Heading No. 44.10, Sub-heading No. 4410.90. This decision being in favour of the manufacturers, the appeals relating to this period are by the revenue. For the second period writ petitions filed by the manufacturers in the Gauhati High Court were allowed by the judgment dated 23.3.1993 reported in 1993 (66) E.L.T. 345 - Arunachal Forests Products Ltd. v. Union of India. Civil Appeal Nos. 3977-4020/94 are by the revenue against the decision. For the third period, the writ petitions filed by the manufacturers in the Gauhati High Court have failed being dismissed by the judgment dated 17.3.1993 and the manufacturers have challenged that decision.

3. At the outset, the competing headings with reference to which the question has to be decided may be quoted. They are as under:-

"44.08 Plywood, veneered panels and similar laminated wood

4408.10 Marine plywood an aircraft plywood 30%

4408.20 Plywood for tea-chests when cut to size

in panels or shocks and packed in sets 30%

4408.30 Decorative plywood -

4408.40 Cuttings and trimmings of plywood of width

not exceeding 5 centimeters Nil

4408.90 Others 30%

44.10 Articles of wood not elsewhere specified 20%

4410.10 Flush door 30%

4410.90 Others 12%

With effect from 19.3.1990, amended Chapter Note 5 in Chapter 44 was introduced which read as follows:-

"5. For the purposes of heading No. 44.08 the expression similar laminated wood includes block board, laminated board and batten board, in which the core is thick and composed of blocks, laths or battens of wood glued together and surfaced with the outer plies and also panels in which the wooden core is replaced by other materials such as a layer or layers of particle board, fibre board, wood waste glued together, asbestos or cork."

Thereafter with effect form 1.3.1992 a second amendment was made in Chapter Note 5 after which it read as follows:

"5. For the purposes of heading No. 44.08 the expression similar laminated wood includes block board, laminated board and batten board, in which the core is thick and composed of blocks, laths or battens of wood glued or otherwise joined together and surfaced with the outer plies and laso panels in which the wooden core is replaced by other materials such as a layer or layers of particle board, fibre board, wood waste glued together, asbestos or cork."

4. "Block board" has not been expressly specified in any entry. The revenue contends that "block board" is covered by the expression "similar laminated wood" in the heading "Plywood, veneered panels and similar laminated wood" of Heading No. 44.08 and, therefore, falls under the Sub-heading No. 4408.90 - "other" which is the residuary Sub-hea













































Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top