1. Dispute regarding whether teleprinter rolls manufactured from duty-paid printing paper attract additional excise duty under Tariff Item 17(1). (Para 1 )
Back
Next 
1997 Supreme(SC) 99
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
B.P.Jeevan Reddy : Sujata V.Manohar
Kores India
Versus
Collector Of Central Excise
Case No. : 3519 , 3520 of 1990
Date of Decision : 1/22/97
Advocates Appeared: John K.J. : Mishra R.R. : Mishra Yogesh K. : Varma V.K. : Vellapally Joseph
Teleprinter rolls manufactured from printing paper that has already borne excise duty under Tariff Item 17(1) of the Central Excise Tariff do not attract further excise duty.
Headnote:(A) Central Excise Tariff - Item 17(1) - Teleprinter rolls - Excise duty - Whether teleprinter rolls manufactured from duty-paid printing paper attract further duty under the same tariff item - Clarification issued by the relevant authority states that while such rolls are excisable as printing paper, no further excise duty is attracted if they are made from printing and writing paper which has already borne duty under the said item - Court declines to pronounce on merits in view of the clarification. (Para 1)
(B) Refund - Claims for refund to be dealt with in accordance with the judgment of the larger Constitution bench in the relevant precedent. (Para 3)
Facts of the case:
The appellant manufactures teleprinter rolls using printing paper that has already been subjected to excise duty. A dispute arose as to whether these rolls attract additional duty under the applicable tariff item.
Findings of Court:
If the teleprinter rolls are manufactured out of duty-paid printing paper, no further excise duty is payable.
Issues: Whether teleprinter rolls manufactured from duty-paid printing paper attract further excise duty under Tariff Item 17(1).
Ratio Decidendi: In light of the clarification provided by the administrative board, no further excise duty is payable on products made from materials that have already borne duty under the same tariff item.
Result: Appeals disposed of.
Legal Category Hierarchy
Table of Contents
2. Whether teleprinter rolls manufactured from duty-paid printing paper are subject to further excise duty under Tariff Item 17(1). (Para 1 )
3. The Central Board of Excise and Customs clarified that teleprinter rolls made from printing paper already bearing duty under Tariff Item 17(1) attract no further excise duty. (Para 1 )
4. Teleprinter rolls manufactured from printing and writing paper that has already borne excise duty under Tariff Item 17(1) are not subject to further excise duty. (Para 1 , 2 )
5. Appeals disposed of with a direction that no further excise duty is payable on teleprinter rolls manufactured from duty-paid printing paper. (Para 2 , 4 )
6. Does excise duty apply to teleprinter rolls manufactured from printing paper that has already borne duty under Tariff Item 17(1)?
No, as clarified by the Central Board of Excise and Customs, no further excise duty is attracted if the rolls are made from printing and writing paper that has already borne duty under Tariff Item 17(1). (Para 1 , 2 )
7. What is the legal position regarding the refund of excise duty in such cases?
The question of refund is governed by the precedent set by the larger Constitution bench in Mafatlal Industries v. Union of India and shall be dealt with accordingly upon a claim. (Para 3 )
(1) THE controversy in these appeals is whether the teleprinter trolls which are manufactared by the appellant from out of the duty-paid printing paper attract duty again under Tariff Item 17(1 as amended in 1976. We are not going into the merits of this controversy for the reason that the central Board of Excise and Customs appears to have itself clarified in its letter No. 61/66/76-CX. 2, dated 18/04/1977 that teleprinter rolls among other products are excisable as printing paper falling under Item 17(1 of central Excise Tariff and further that "No further excise duty would be attracted if they are made from printing and writing paper which has already borne duty under Tariff Item No. 17(1 of central Excise Tariff".
(2) IN this view of the matter, it is not necessary for us to pronounce upon the merits of this case.We direct that if the teleprinter rolls are manufactured out of duty-paid printing paper, no further excise duty is payable by them.
(3) SO far as the question of refund is concerned, the matter is covered by the judgment of the larger Constitution bench in Mafatlal Industries v. Union of India [1997 (89 E.L.T. 247 (S.C.) 1996 (9 SCALE 457] and shall be dealt with accordingly as and when any such claim is made.
(4) THE appeals are accordingly disposed of. No costs.
