Duty on empty containers denied where no new commodity arose and prior levy had already been borne

Duty was not payable on empty drums or containers found in the assessees' hands after the contents had been removed, because the assessees had not manufactured those containers and emptying them did not create any new commodity in their factory. Any duty attributable to the containers had already been discharged at the stage of manufacture and clearance by the original manufacturer, so the inclusion of container cost in the value of the contents did not justify a second levy. As the duty demand itself failed, the connected penalties on the firm and its officers had no independent basis and were unsustainable.

---

---

Issues: Whether duty was payable on empty drums/containers obtained after removal of the contents, and whether the connected penalties could survive.

Analysis: The containers were not manufactured by the assessees; they were only emptied after the duty-paid contents were taken out. Emptying the contents did not bring into existence any new commodity in the assessees' factory. The duty, if any, on the containers had already been borne at the stage of their manufacture and clearance by the original manufacturer. The fact that the cost of the containers may have been included in the value of the contents did not make the assessees liable to a second levy on the same containers. Since the duty demand itself failed, the personal penalties on the officers had no independent footing.

Conclusion: Duty was not payable on the empty containers in the hands of the assessees, and the penalties on the firm and its officers were unsustainable.

---