TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
1990 (11) TMI 240
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....dule", for short) attracting Central Excise duty at 35% ad valorem in terms of Serial Number 15 of the Table annexed to Central Excise Notfn. No. 132/86 dated 1-3-1986. The notification provided inter alia the said concessional rate of duty for silicones in primary form if they were manufactured out of Chlorosilanes on which the excise duty, or the additional duty of customs, leviable thereon, as the case may be, had already been paid. The appellants were manufacturing the product using imported Chlorosilanes on which additional duty of customs had been paid. The Asstt. Collector, however, denied the benefit of the concessional rate of 35% ad valorem on the ground that the appellants had availed themselves of the Modvat credit of the additi....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....aid rules." It was the learned counsel's contention that in the absence of any such prohibition or restriction in Notification No. 132/86, the department was in error in denying the benefit of the notification. In this connection, he relied on the Madras High Court's judgment in BHEL Ancillary Association v. CCE -1990 (49) E.L.T. 33 (Mad.) which lays down that an "exemption should not be whittled down by importing limitations not specifically inserted by the language used in Exception Clause". 4. The learned DR countered the above contention by referring to Central Excise Rule 57F(1)(ii) which provides that inputs in respect of which credit had been taken of the duty paid were allowed to be cleared for home consumption or for export on pa....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....id on which had been taken credit of, should be made to suffer duty if they are to be allowed to be cleared into the country for home consumption on exports in the same way as inputs in the normal course would be. Otherwise, we will have the wholly untenable situation of inputs of both types, duty paid as well as 'duty-relieved' (to consider a term) entering the market. 7. Nor do we see any force in the Revenue's contention that Notification No.132/86 does not apply in the present case because it does not confer full exemption from duty unlike Notification Nos. 54/88 and 178/88. Whether the concessional rate of duty should be 35% ad valorem or 'nil' is a matter of policy. But that cannot influence the interpretation of a notification espec....