Rule 56B permission for semi-finished goods was not barred by Rule 9's general removal provision.

Rule 9 of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 was treated as a general provision on removal of excisable goods and payment of duty, while Rule 56B operated as a special procedure for removal of semi-finished goods for further processing. The provisions had to be read harmoniously, so Rule 9 could not be used as an absolute bar to discretion under Rule 56B. Copper winding wire drawn from duty-paid copper rods was described as an intermediate or semi-finished product intended for further manufacture. Permission under Rule 56B could therefore be granted where the Collector was satisfied that the goods required further processing.

---

---

Issues: Whether Rule 9 of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 absolutely barred grant of permission under Rule 56B for removal of bare copper wire to another factory for insulation and return after processing.

Analysis: Rule 9 is a general provision governing removal of excisable goods and payment of duty, while Rule 56B creates a special procedure enabling removal of semi-finished goods for further manufacturing processes. The two provisions must be read harmoniously so that the special permission under Rule 56B is not rendered otiose by the general embargo in Rule 9. The copper winding wire drawn from duty-paid copper rods was an intermediate or semi-finished product intended for further processing and not a case where Rule 9 could be treated as an absolute prohibition against exercise of discretion under Rule 56B.

Conclusion: Rule 9 did not impose a total bar, and the Collector could grant permission under Rule 56B if satisfied that the goods were semi-finished or intermediate goods requiring further processing.

---