High Court Of Calcutta
A. K. Sengupta
DULICHAND SHREELAL - Appellant
Versus
COLLECTOR OF CENTRAL EXCISE - Respondent
CO 4117 (W) Of 1984
Decided On : 04/28/1986
A. K. SENGUPTA, J. ( 1 ) THE Petitioner, a partnership firm, carries on business of manufacture of vegetable non-essential oils falling under tariff item No. 12 of the Central Excise Tariff at its factory with the solvent extraction plant situated at the suburbs of Calcutta. The petitioner is required to pay duty on the manufactured product under Tariff Item No. 12. The petitioner also manufactures acid oil by treating soap stock obtained in the process of refining vegetable non-essential oils and obtains spent earth which are only by-products resulting from the products of oil mill and solvent extraction plant. According to the petitioner the said byproducts are exempt under Tariff Item No. 68 for which no clearance was required to be obtained under the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944 and no duty was required to be paid therefor.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner was directed, by the order dated 25th June, 1977, to obtain licence for manufacture of acid oil out of soap stock obtained from the processing of vegetable non-essential oils and the petitioner was directed to pay duty at the rate of 2% ad valorem as leviable under Tariff Item No. 68. This direction by the Superintendent, Central Excise, in terms whereof the petitioner obtained the licence for manufacture of the said acid oil out of soap stock and started paying duty on and from 12th August, 1977, was illegal and contrary to the said exemption notifications. The petitioner had to comply with the said direction to avoid penal consequences.
Finding of the Court:
The imposition and the collection of the excise duty on the aforesaid products manufactured by the petitioner is illegal. In other words, the assessments made levying the duty are consequentially illegal. Therefore, the Court can under such circumstances set aside the orders of assessment and direct the respondents to refund the duty illegally collected.
Issues: None
Ratio Decidendi: When the duty was imposed by the respondents on the product manufactured by the petitioner under Tariff Item No. 68, it was not known to the respondents that there was an exemption notification which entitled the petitioner to get exemption from duty. There was thus a mistake of law which is common to both the assessee and the taxing authority.
Final Decision: The respondents are directed to refund the sums of Rs. 2,18,140. 71 and Rs. 51,859. 29 with interest at the rate of 12 per cent per annum from the date of collection till the date of payment.
( 1 ) THE Petitioner, a partnership firm, carries on business of manufacture of vegetable non-essential oils falling under tariff item No. 12 of the Central Excise Tariff at its factory with the solvent extraction plant situated at the suburbs of Calcutta. The petitioner is required to pay duty on the manufactured product under Tariff Item No. 12. The petitioner also manufactures acid oil by treating soap stock obtained in the process of refining vegetable non-essential oils and obtains spent earth which are only by-products resulting from the products of oil mill and solvent extraction plant. According to the petitioner the said byproducts are exempt under Tariff Item No. 68 for which no clearance was required to be obtained under the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944 and no duty was required to be paid therefor.
( 2 ) BY a letter bearing No. IR 326, dated 26th June, 1977, the Superintendent, Central Excise, AR-III, Calcutta-III Division, the respondent No. 3 herein, intimated -the petitioner that the manufacture of acid oil out of soap stock obtained from the processing of vegetable non-essential oils in the petitioner's factory was not' covered by any other Tariff item of the Central Excise Tariff. It attracted duty under Tariff Item No. 68 being goods not elsewhere specified and duty at the rate of 2% ad valorem is leviable on such goods with effect from 18th June, 1977. It has also been stated in the said letter that in terms of notification No. 176/77, dated 18th June, 1977, the manufacturers whose capital investment made from time to time on plant and machinery installed in the industrial unit is more than Rs. 10 lakhs are required to pay duty under Tariff Item No. 68. The petitioner was, therefore, directed to take out licence for manufacture of goods covered under Tariff Item No. 68 and observe all Central Excise formalities before any removal of such goods from the factory. The petitioner was also directed to pay appropriate Central Excise duty on such goods before removal. It was also pointed out that any deviation from observing the Central Excise formalities would be tantamount to violation of the Central Excise Rules and the petitioner would be liable for penal action.
( 3 ) IN terms of the aforesaid direction, the petitioner obtained separate licence being Central Excise Licence L-4 under Tariff Item No. 68 for manufacture of goods including acid oil obtained as by-product and started making payment of duty on and from 12th August, 1977.
( 4 ) IN or about July, 1979 the petitioner, it is alleged, for the first time came to know that the Collector, Central Excise, Guntur had in fact exempted soap stock obtained as by-product in oil mill and solvent extraction plant from payment of excise duty under Tariff Item No. 68 in terms of Notification No. 115/75-C. E. , dated 30th April, 1975 issued by the Central Government along with its amendment vide Notification No. 122/75-C. E. , dated 5th May, 1975. Immediately thereafter, the petitioner by letter dated 1st August, 1979 intimated the Assistant Collector, Central Excise, Calcutta-Ill Division as follows :-"we have the following 3 independent units in the same premises at P-143, Raymond Road, Calcutta : 1. Oil mill. 2. Solvent extraction plant. 3. Vegetable oil refinery. In the vegetable oil refinery we process the oil coming out of the solvent extraction plant as well as the oil purchased from the market. Presently we are processing the crude rapeseed oil supplied by the West Bengal Essential Commodities Supply Corporation (a Government of West Bengal Undertaking) and deliver back the refined oil to them. While processing this oil, we are getting soap stock as by-product which is being later converted to acid oil by treatment with sulphuric acid. We understand that soap stock and acid oil come under Tariff Item 68 on which duty at the rate of 8% ad valorem is chargeable. As our units come under the category of oil mill and solvent extraction p
D. Cawasji and Company v. State of Mysore
REFERRED TO : State of Madhya Pradesh and Anr. v. Bhailal Bhai and Ors.
Patel India (Private) Ltd. v. Union of India and Ors.
Shiv Shankar Dal Mills v. State of Haryana and Ors.
Sales Tax Officer, Benaras and Ors. v. Kanhaiyaial Mukandlal Safar
Burmah Construction Company v. The State of Orissa and Ors.
V. Mohammad Ismail Rowther v. The Sales Tax Officer, Adoor and Anr.
Assistant Collector of Customs, Madras and Ors. v. Premraj and Ganapatraj and Co. (P) Ltd.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.