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

1981 Supreme(All) 191

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD
U. C. Srivastava and K. N. Goyal, JJ.
OUDH SUGAR MILL LTD. - Appellant
Versus
UNION OF INDIA (UOI) - Respondents
Writ Petition 3662 Of 1980
Decided On : 04/13/1981

Advocates Appeared:
R.K.SRIVASTAVA, R.N.TRIVEDI

An intermediate product which is by itself goods known to the market and is used in captive consumption for bringing out altogether a new goods not by an integrated process, but by a distinct and separate process is liable to excise duty before its removal for purposes of its character (sic) for bringing out another finished goods.

Headnote:

CENTRAL EXCISES AND SALT ACT - MOLASSES - INCLUSION IN ITEM 15CC OF 1ST SCHEDULE - LEVY OF EXCISE DUTY - VALIDITY - RULES 9 AND 49 OF CENTRAL EXCISE RULES - INTERPRETATION - FACTUAL POSITION - DISTINCTION FROM CASE LAWS - MEANING OF REMOVAL - RULE 49(1) - INTERPRETATION - CUMULATIVE READING OF RULES 9 AND 49 - CONCLUSION.

Fact of the Case:

Two Sugar Mills filed writ petitions challenging the inclusion of molasses in Item 15cc of the 1st Schedule to the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944, and the demand notice issued pursuant to it. They contended that molasses is not a waste product but an intermediate product used as raw material for manufacturing alcohol in their captive consumption distillery located in the same compound as the Sugar Factory. They argued that there was no removal of molasses from the factory and that the Collector had not specified the place for storage of molasses, as required under Rule 9 of the Central Excise Rules.

Finding of the Court:

The court held that molasses is an intermediate product which is by itself goods known to the market and is used in captive consumption for bringing out altogether a new goods not by an integrated process, but by a distinct and separate process is liable to excise duty before its removal for purposes of its character (sic) for bringing out another finished goods.

Issues: 1. Whether molasses is an excisable article under the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944? 2. Whether the levy of excise duty on molasses used for captive consumption in the petitioners' distillery is valid? 3. Whether Rules 9 and 49 of the Central Excise Rules bar the levy and collection of excise duty on molasses used for captive consumption in the petitioners' distillery?

Ratio Decidendi: 1. Molasses is an intermediate product which is by itself goods known to the market and is used in captive consumption for bringing out altogether a new goods not by an integrated process, but by a distinct and separate process is liable to excise duty before its removal for purposes of its character (sic) for bringing out another finished goods. 2. The levy of excise duty on molasses used for captive consumption in the petitioners' distillery is valid. 3. Rules 9 and 49 of the Central Excise Rules do not bar the levy and collection of excise duty on molasses used for captive consumption in the petitioners' distillery.

Final Decision: The writ petitions were dismissed with costs.

U. C. SRIVASTAVA, J.


( 1 ) THESE writ petitions have been filed by two Sugar Mills praying for the quashing of inclusion of molasses in Item 15cc of the 1st Schedule to the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944, and also for quashing the demand notice in pursuance thereof. Apart from other reliefs declaring certain provisions of the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944 ultra vires, a prayer is for issue of a writ in the nature of mandamus commanding the opposite parties not to deposit or realise any excise duty on molasses used for captive consumption in their distillery which is located in the compound in which the Sugar Factory itself is located. At the time of hearing of these writ petitions, the other pleas including the plea that molasses is a waste product was given up and it was contended by Sri Sorabjee appearing on behalf of the petitioners in one writ petition and Sri k R. Bhatt, Advocate appearing for the petitioner in the other writ petition that molasses is not a waste product but is the intermediate product during the course of manufacture of sugar from sugarcane and the same is used as raw material for manufacturing alcohol in the petitioners distillery. It was canvassed before us that molasses is used in captive consumption and in the same compound for manufacture of alcohol in the Distillery and is not removed from the factory and the Collector not having specified the place for storage of molasses, there could not be any levy and collection of duty on molasses in the absence of any such specification, as is required under Rule 9 of the Central Excise Rules. There is thus no removal of molasses from the factory itself as the Distillery is also included in their factory licence and is located in the same compound. The levy and collection of excise duty was without any authority of law and in violation of Rules 9 and 49 of Central Excise Rules. The other pleas raised in the writ petitions were not argued.

( 2 ) FOR the first time in the Finance Act, 1980, which came into force with effect from midnight of 18/19th June, 1980 molasses has been included in 1st Schedule to Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944, as Item No. 15-CC and has thus been made excisable goods within the meaning of the said act.

( 3 ) THE charging Section under the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944, is Section 3 and Section 3 (1) which is relevant reads thus : Section 3 (1 ). Duties specified in the 1st Schedule to be levied: (1) There shall be levied and collected in such manner as may be prescribed duties of excise on all excisable goods other than salt which are produced or manufactured in India and a duty on salt manufactured in, or imported by land into, any part of India as, and at the rates setforth in the first Schedule.

( 4 ) SECTION 3 (1) of the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944 (hereinafter mentioned as act)authorises levy on manufacture or production of goods which levy also gets sanction from Entry 84 of the List I of Seventh Schedule to the Constitution of India which provides for levy of excise duty of tobacco and other goods manufactured or produced in India except certain narcotics and alcoholic preparations. Thus excise duty can be levied only on goods which are manufactured or produced in India.


( 5 ) THE word goods has not been defined in the Act and as such its dictionary meaning is to be seen. In the dictionary goods means something which can ordinarily come to the market to be bought and sold and is known to the market as goods. The word manufacture as a verb is generally understood and means bringing into existence a new substance and does not mean merely to produce some change in substance however minor it may be. In the Act a wide definition to the word manufacture has been given in Section 2 (f) and the said word includes any process incidental or ancillary to the processing of manufactured product. The word production has not been defined in the Act and it has got no exact legal meaning and as such it is to be interprete

























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