Common parlance meaning of "telephone exchange" denied concessional duty for a factory's internal communication air conditioner.

An air conditioner installed for a factory's internal telephone facility was not treated as one used in a "telephone exchange" for concessional duty under Notification No. 56/78-C.E. The term "telephone exchange" was not defined in the notification, so it was read in its ordinary commercial sense as a facility where independent lines are exchanged between different customers. A private internal communication arrangement within the factory did not meet that meaning, and no material showed that common usage would extend the expression to such an installation. The exemption was therefore correctly denied.

---

---

Issues: Whether an air conditioner used in the appellants' factory telephone facility for internal communication qualified for concessional duty under Notification No. 56/78-C.E. as an air conditioner used in a telephone exchange.

Analysis: The expression "telephone exchange" was not defined in the notification, so its meaning had to be ascertained in common parlance. In ordinary understanding, a telephone exchange is a facility from which independent lines are exchanged between different customers. The facility in the factory was used only for the appellants' internal and exclusive communication arrangements and did not answer that description. No material was produced to show that common understanding would include such an internal factory arrangement within "telephone exchange".

Conclusion: The air conditioner did not qualify for the concession under Notification No. 56/78-C.E., and the disallowance of the exemption was correct.

---