Exempt excise duty cannot count as duty payable for tax credit; goods must be classified by commercial identity.

Excise duty fully exempt under a valid notification cannot be treated as duty payable for computing a tax credit certificate under section 280ZD, because entitlement depends on duty actually payable on the excess clearance. The assessee was therefore not entitled to claim credit on the exempt duty component. For classification, goods must be assessed by their commercial identity, not merely by end use. Wrapper paper was properly treated as a separate variety, but the further segregation of newsprint into categories sold to newspapers and to others required fresh consideration on the correct commercial test. The writ petition succeeded only in part, and the matter was remanded for reconsideration of newsprint classification.

---

---

Issues: (i) Whether excise duty exempted by notification could still be treated as duty payable for computing the tax credit certificate under section 280ZD; (ii) Whether newsprint manufactured by the assessee had to be treated as one class of goods or as separate varieties for the purpose of the tax credit certificate.

Issue (i): Whether excise duty exempted by notification could still be treated as duty payable for computing the tax credit certificate under section 280ZD.

Analysis: The entitlement under section 280ZD depends not only on excess clearance over the base year but also on the existence of excise duty payable on such excess clearance. Where duty is wholly exempt under a valid exemption notification issued under the rule-making power, the duty ceases to be assessable or payable to that extent. The amount of duty exempted cannot be treated as duty payable merely because it is leviable in the abstract under the charging provision.

Conclusion: The exempted newsprint could not be taken as carrying duty payable, and the assessee was not entitled on that basis.

Issue (ii): Whether newsprint manufactured by the assessee had to be treated as one class of goods or as separate varieties for the purpose of the tax credit certificate.

Analysis: Different varieties of goods must be considered separately if, in commercial sense, they are understood as distinct goods. The wrapper paper was treated as a separate variety because it was commercially different. However, there was no proper examination whether newsprint sold to newspapers and newsprint sold to others were commercially distinct varieties or one class of goods. The manner of use by itself does not determine a different variety, and the matter required reconsideration on the correct commercial test.

Conclusion: The separate treatment of wrapper paper was sustained, but the segregation of newsprint into further categories required fresh consideration.

Final Conclusion: The writ petition succeeded only in part. The appellate order was set aside and the matter was sent back for a fresh decision on the correct legal basis regarding the classification of newsprint.

Ratio Decidendi: For computing a tax credit linked to excise duty payable, duty that is fully exempt by a valid notification is not payable, and classification of goods for such benefit must be made according to their commercial identity rather than merely their end use.

---